IETF Logo Mail Archive

[spring] IPv4 EH proposal

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Sat, 07 September 2019 11:32 UTC

Return-Path: <robert@raszuk.net>
X-Original-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC162120D5C for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 7 Sep 2019 04:32:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=raszuk.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1oEFEIyp1_Ao for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 7 Sep 2019 04:32:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt1-x830.google.com (mail-qt1-x830.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::830]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F90F120DF3 for <spring@ietf.org>; Sat, 7 Sep 2019 04:32:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt1-x830.google.com with SMTP id j10so10368719qtp.8 for <spring@ietf.org>; Sat, 07 Sep 2019 04:32:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=raszuk.net; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=hftgRjycLWMsqVAc/9Sw6C0AoZU722470CZJSdeid+c=; b=RZOTO5UKVYeshQVUERm7i5LrA+QhtaRAeW2KHhaqHSOo8AxLIOVEFh6Yb9zq/Mzl3O 7WtFk87xCNsWl7jChgQBT3U8ALRxmG/0+d989m8QJ5+Tx2otSNwr5duWUw4SKYNwIHQF p+F9l3x1xGs6Vp5JaPGc8kA1c8LqcmWgEaddjARC6LRT1/evLAC06+UGiiE0QWRRm9sA GBOoOtr/WWHm+Bg1pHXW0xGC8OY4C0iThNCyAuY9rab31Ivs45h6UsIF+pGIJyJhvHN8 TsKMcnHeo6vK4Menv59UEReEoGZ2PuYdBayz2JmZPsLXpKQXoqHzB2Cz7ucOjXYv2Vxp L1wA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=hftgRjycLWMsqVAc/9Sw6C0AoZU722470CZJSdeid+c=; b=YP3TkbcMeO1UaKEe8twQu1LTIM9JhAL0ncFVljj+c8uUbvdekAyInEwa/S9lhFyHaA hiomVB03u5Re8BTEwHBjrJ+t9QsBUVbkeFK6t1frYk17v0UIOa6m0mZbaK3/oiaSklWe zC5xB9opQCc2L4l0jdYUonCAgwzj6duNz5GYjARZ3YYLciDK18oBuA7UM4LueKg4cAkJ NbPbk/Xtpfaucyu87qClJU0oZYhQlgr5y9Ql9oqe1I1DJjKbfzNOKilxF1qtgKTosN1u aYkB9VPOOMUMyYOY6aLexTRcTMaTvZDuyH2lU5Qcjms5vJlDpAj0w5J+eeVWJ0Lt4YAY hP+w==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAX6iRKp8Wo8ujz6nLKeyOdtf9/44f3jSQlpjp8rGUGB0GCYrGZv zKAAezxzVGVyNj8NoorF45NuSWrnARtGWYHicvKGOw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzyCl+q9sMqsHgIUNRxb/zGtQoFXjsqLqHtjcPGhCSsAqNEqz83k4eaXTXedlELoc7inJ32ZJjxWbN0os8vG74=
X-Received: by 2002:ad4:4d8e:: with SMTP id cv14mr581060qvb.49.1567855932649; Sat, 07 Sep 2019 04:32:12 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <BYAPR05MB5463153B47BFE83350C566E7AEBA0@BYAPR05MB5463.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <CA+b+ERm4x072JQZQovX0MVcea3=0DOCSESopAXj_SE1vMi8qkQ@mail.gmail.com> <06CF729DA0D6854E8C1E5121AC3330DFAE9362F9@dggemm529-mbs.china.huawei.com> <CAO42Z2y-hq71wr9ogzmn2=rO0xySy63iXhNXrFDuqO7r5Pwa7A@mail.gmail.com> <CAOj+MMFN5pbaVePWrJA61jd7f9d_2bU-Nu9oppFDsAc_B7APDw@mail.gmail.com> <CAO42Z2x4-9-1YseuyqnCRh7c+J-zb2ksGXpk_Hs17H5uLz4Hvg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAO42Z2x4-9-1YseuyqnCRh7c+J-zb2ksGXpk_Hs17H5uLz4Hvg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Date: Sat, 07 Sep 2019 13:32:03 +0200
Message-ID: <CAOj+MMHHMdGm6Qea4E1ugQBrSYFr7e-FgP+pxoErhEwRR9GwKw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>, Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Cc: "spring@ietf.org" <spring@ietf.org>, "6man@ietf.org" <6man@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ecc7c30591f4e79d"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/MfxoOtRFOaZqtGd5Mm_Lvh_l8mI>
Subject: [spring] IPv4 EH proposal
X-BeenThere: spring@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Source Packet Routing in NetworkinG \(SPRING\)" <spring.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spring>, <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spring/>
List-Post: <mailto:spring@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring>, <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Sep 2019 11:32:16 -0000

/* Adjusting the subject to reflect the topic */

Ok ... I looked at the new wave of mails in wrong order :)

I like this proposal:

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-herbert-ipv4-eh-01

And have absolutely nothing against progressing it further - it looks on
the surface to be more efficient then sr-mpls over IP - but how many bits
are we saving needs to be calculated to state if cost of introducing new
encoding justifies the additional control plane, protocol and platform
efforts

In fact if we would get to the consensus of using SRH with SID & BSID to be
of fixed 20 bits it can reuse a lot of mechanism build for sr-mpls in any
commercial router.

 It is just a bit amazing that insertion of EHs into IPv4 would be less
problematic that in the case of IPv6 :) Maybe due to allowed fragmentation.

As to the host dropping packets due to unknown protocol - let's observe
that SR domain would clean such EH before passing packets further.

Many thx,
R.



On Sat, Sep 7, 2019 at 1:14 PM Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 7 Sep 2019 at 19:56, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> wrote:
> >
> > > It's tempting to write up SR over IPv4
> >
> > You don't have to write anything ... it is already written and looks
> like moving fwd :)
> >
> > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-sr-over-ip-07
> >
>
> That's tunnelling MPLS over SR over IPv4. I'm talking about native SR
> over IPv4 e.g. "SRv4".
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email