Re: [spring] FW: New Version Notification for draft-bonica-spring-sr-mapped-six-00.txt

Hi Ron,

I am not sure if there is any ongoing debate. To me this all boils down to
a very simple
few questions which can be summarized as below:

*Q1: Do we want to enable services (VPN, TE, SFC ....) over native single
unified *
*       IPv/v6 transport ?*

     If No - end of the debate - use currently shipping tools.
     If Yes - then

          *Q2 - Do we want to complicate networks with new mapping
schema (considering *
*                  we already have one shipping SR-MPLS over IPv4/v6) ?*

                If No - end of the debate - use SR-MPLS over IP or MPLS
over IP.
                If Yes - then

*                     Q3 - Are we open for combined control plane **solution
with fixed low overhead ? *

                          If Yes - Pls consider LISP
or draft-raszuk-teas-ip-te-np
                          If No - why ?

Best,
Robert.

On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 12:59 AM Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net> wrote:

> Robert,
>
>
>
> Good to hear from you and thanks for the complement.
>
>
>
> Your question goes to the heart of the SR and IPv6 debate and will require
> more than an email to answer. Standby for a document in the next few weeks.
>
>
>
>
>                                                      Ron
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* spring <spring-bounces@ietf.org> *On Behalf Of *Robert Raszuk
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 20, 2019 9:31 AM
> *To:* Ron Bonica <rbonica=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>
> *Cc:* SPRING WG <spring@ietf.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [spring] FW: New Version Notification for
> draft-bonica-spring-sr-mapped-six-00.txt
>
>
>
> Hi Ron,
>
>
>
> I must first say that this is very cleanly written draft ... easy read !
>
>
>
> But after reading it now I have one major question - what document/spec
> function is this draft attempts to serve ?
>
>
>
> Is it new SR Architecture ? Normative references still refers to RFC8402,
> but its body is clearly not compliant with it.  Not sure if this is
> omission or intentional.
>
>
>
> It redefines fundamental RFC8402 definitions - for example it redefines
> SRv6 prefix SID.
>
>
>
>
>
> *3.1.3.  SRv6    When SR is used over the IPv6 data plane:    o  A
> Prefix-SID is an IPv6 address.*
>
>
>
> So please could you share what is the intended role of this draft ? At
> this point I do not see that it is aiming to update RFC8402, but just
> define a new set of encodings which contradict directly with it.
>
>
>
> Many thx,
>
> R.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 7:14 PM Ron Bonica <rbonica=
> 40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Juniper Business Use Only
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org <internet-drafts@ietf.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 1:09 PM
> To: Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>; Shraddha Hegde <shraddha@juniper.net>;
> Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com>; Gang Chen <
> phdgang@gmail.com>; Joel Halpern <joel.halpern@ericsson.com>; Andrew
> Alston <andrew.alston@liquidtelecom.com>; Luay Jalil <
> luay.jalil@one.verizon.com>; Yuji Kamite <y.kamite@ntt.com>; Jen Linkova <
> furry@google.com>; Daniam Henriques <daniam.henriques@liquidtelecom.com>
> Subject: New Version Notification for
> draft-bonica-spring-sr-mapped-six-00.txt
>
>
> A new version of I-D, draft-bonica-spring-sr-mapped-six-00.txt
> has been successfully submitted by Ron Bonica and posted to the IETF
> repository.
>
> Name:           draft-bonica-spring-sr-mapped-six
> Revision:       00
> Title:          Segment Routing Mapped To IPv6 (SRm6)
> Document date:  2019-11-19
> Group:          Individual Submission
> Pages:          24
> URL:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bonica-spring-sr-mapped-six-00
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tools.ietf..org/html/draft-bonica-spring-sr-mapped-six-00__;!8WoA6RjC81c!W7gGBVD-zguqgZLZW2uxuDeKdGYsUfArP249qioRggS0G3cTwNzP5PlkgaTxZF_w$>
>
>
>
> Abstract:
>    This document describes Segment Routing mapped to IPv6 (SRm6).  SRm6
>    is a Segment Routing (SR) solution that leverages IPv6.  It supports
>    a wide variety of use-cases while remaining in strict compliance with
>    IPv6 specifications.  SRm6 is optimized for ASIC-based forwarding
>    devices that operate at high data rates.
>
>
>
>
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
> submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at
> tools.ietf.org
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/tools.ietf.org__;!8WoA6RjC81c!W7gGBVD-zguqgZLZW2uxuDeKdGYsUfArP249qioRggS0G3cTwNzP5PlkgbRjvgCw$>
> .
>
> The IETF Secretariat
> _______________________________________________
> spring mailing list
> spring@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring__;!8WoA6RjC81c!W7gGBVD-zguqgZLZW2uxuDeKdGYsUfArP249qioRggS0G3cTwNzP5PlkgVRm0Fb5$>
>
>
>
> Juniper Business Use Only
>
>