Re: [spring] Understanding the replication draft

Rishabh,

Transport SID with a service on top can’t be a BoS label, there’s s service label below, since a service is associated with a particular node, there would be at least a N-SID associated with the service node.
It seems like B-SID behavior is the correct one, when R-SID is looked up and popped, it would yield: replication  (as programmed by a controller, since there’s no state) + new label stack associated with the new, post replication/branching path that is imposed on top of existing label stack, so service label ( + optionally more transport labels) are preserved.

Cheers,
Jeff
On Jul 1, 2020, 12:40 PM -0700, Rishabh Parekh <rishabhp@gmail.com>, wrote:
> Robert,
>
> > A) Firmly state that replication SID MUST be the last one on the stack
> > B) Instead of real SID after the replication SID provide a binding SID which locally will be mapped to a different SID list imposed to each replicated flow.
>
> We would be fine with A), but we don't want to exclude possibility of
> something like what you describe in B.
>
> -Rishabh
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 12:27 PM Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Rishabh,
> >
> > > Of course, care must be
> > > taken to avoid the "explosion" as you describe it. G-SID-2 has to map
> > > to a unique node; for example, it may be an Anycast-SID that takes
> > > packet to distinct nodes from each of the downstream node, or the
> > > downstream nodes can be border nodes connecting to other segment
> > > routing domains where G-SID-2 resolves to distinct nodes in each
> > > domain.
> >
> > I think you are stretching it too thin.
> >
> > See even if G-SID-2 is anycast SID you have zero assurance that physical nodes packets will land on would be at all diverse.
> >
> > Likewise crossing domains yet providing identical global SID now to be a different node in each such domain to me is not a realistic example.
> >
> > I think we have two options:
> >
> > A) Firmly state that replication SID MUST be the last one on the stack
> >
> > B) Instead of real SID after the replication SID provide a binding SID which locally will be mapped to a different SID list imposed to each replicated flow.
> >
> > What is currently in the draft seems to be very counterintuitive and IMHO will result in operational difficulties.
> >
> > Thx a lot,
> > R.
>
> _______________________________________________
> spring mailing list
> spring@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring