[spring] comments on draft-ali-6man-spring-srv6-oam-03

li zhenqiang <li_zhenqiang@hotmail.com> Fri, 23 August 2019 10:25 UTC

Return-Path: <li_zhenqiang@hotmail.com>
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 C17941200B6; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 03:25:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.115
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.115 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD2=0.874, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=hotmail.com
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 1a-7g1MwbzvS; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 03:25:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from APC01-SG2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-oln040092253105.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.92.253.105]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48776120804; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 03:25:27 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=e0mXlAUbGPTyqqgkF0jBBuITo+IBYtmdBd8R93nLdxM+xsviX5zM+oU/9Bdod/WOZPPYy+ip7zVH+UHbwtzvidGlrXaEckNdGVABMdKgP10iWHmCuxdRX1Ca0W0/g778AFKLsc+zo/XGDwSLqq6YcsYPPm3EHGrGd1dmJDXGBSonc60LZtXThlVU5eb2H0+Bl0ItSktLmHkG/HM8O8we6y6/IQInh07MVJPveNpLuHByDiXj/nqXmJ8Wdulg6iHL8UF0rggZuCXE3KmAuuGYRGX1N75wzafBMbJk8daFh19aklFgL6v3B9+lHSo4e2JfLhK1h90VbNlBfQCEyaAzmA==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=E8CZxmCP6UQWn8wAWEwt8YohaOvXYIzKeMDoLnETRpk=; b=aRk2kzWFshEQfp3KTymtQ21/kRV9j8iGFS5J2wqF0kPEDQ0wBE7Qt3+jnUjrrmySlmkRivfhpkwoLFWKNttXRmL+gBt2fUCkhGEk0h1c2KZjuDEJuQObmLvOhn+sXuyF1Y2By4UV2AD52qVF5d+wbF3zNK9TcT4nwbwuwHbgT7TFC/yusBAlIv+d1NTI5SR/TDRCouwmKAgiw2F3QbVm2RSM8HVVV+vTLwS51WM5EO/FKmRxTEh7tWSgUImnQ8zPGuYk/Nmax5BrcsQUugMk6Tve01lW6gF7qlQNYVDfqJ8ViT8+6JgZMXhzyn1EPRN7LWY0fAnIZzFGV9deTnhvYA==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=none; dmarc=none; dkim=none; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hotmail.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=E8CZxmCP6UQWn8wAWEwt8YohaOvXYIzKeMDoLnETRpk=; b=rhNsFzvFb6Zm1FtafPGs9r5SWStuypmCCAIWD2Vt0BVKAiSADZvXy3Cgd8a7scd1Sch/L9sK3mIkc9C67N01yoCxO0QxfSkfPdGkg2gwQUk9YQN8ynj1oSsB/GLx+WwQan3RsJGn9YdhNs8tdWuebJRkjAF/ek4LiMC8epPO3hpLq/m4sXNPepoInmRHYqsR6nmdBfOHkfQPRhy2OyzBm/GvXJ6DbjI1BNPSrW4x0nGallWvYFJanTh8PYLGxMPSaPQyhQPTV6ILoH3tGWE430HKJio0DMtE/WZdNTR/GqCDCsm3m5B0+R1BOyFi8d03KPZKSIGfdQB3JGArE3aWOg==
Received: from HK2APC01FT028.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com (10.152.248.56) by HK2APC01HT106.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com (10.152.249.166) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id 15.20.2199.13; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 10:25:24 +0000
Received: from SG2PR06MB3159.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.152.248.51) by HK2APC01FT028.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.248.196) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2199.13 via Frontend Transport; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 10:25:24 +0000
Received: from SG2PR06MB3159.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::f9b1:dad0:b1e1:5f24]) by SG2PR06MB3159.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::f9b1:dad0:b1e1:5f24%2]) with mapi id 15.20.2178.020; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 10:25:24 +0000
From: li zhenqiang <li_zhenqiang@hotmail.com>
To: draft-ali-6man-spring-srv6-oam <draft-ali-6man-spring-srv6-oam@ietf.org>, spring <spring@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: comments on draft-ali-6man-spring-srv6-oam-03
Thread-Index: AQHVWZ0TLsET2a8RX06Wt0hHfChkDg==
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 10:25:24 +0000
Message-ID: <SG2PR06MB3159DF7B3D79BA2AA1876C74FCA40@SG2PR06MB3159.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-clientproxiedby: HK0PR04CA0018.apcprd04.prod.outlook.com (2603:1096:203:36::30) To SG2PR06MB3159.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com (2603:1096:4:73::20)
x-incomingtopheadermarker: OriginalChecksum:3A05682CF9A36CFFB30B59822D4E4A81702DBB5EE106B30FF8691EBBC7EBA6FA; UpperCasedChecksum:C254DC368A0759E979FE4EDA43CD2E68E9BF47AE40B25A39EB36F750865E008E; SizeAsReceived:7350; Count:49
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-has-attach: no
x-mailer: Foxmail 7.2.9.156[cn]
x-tmn: [ad7rq+4LU+KSyicXeFqJK6G+VFmzKLcsgvBnbjB4WJA=]
x-microsoft-original-message-id: <2019082318242087263859@hotmail.com>
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-incomingheadercount: 49
x-eopattributedmessage: 0
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(5050001)(7020095)(20181119110)(201702061078)(5061506573)(5061507331)(1603103135)(2017031320274)(2017031322404)(2017031323274)(2017031324274)(1601125500)(1603101475)(1701031045); SRVR:HK2APC01HT106;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: HK2APC01HT106:
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: CV365H7U7l2qG9sQn/YZJkRuytHKR5Bgk7I/7g8fhVlXYzgjKNvCW0A5cDpV4trno3E7Gle4/RimqBneZe0kQS0lPLsLReGXR862QAfza9Ef5an1qlbIHl8MFR7HpGM7CK3bKZQtjNgqGndZDx6zbMqSx5p9OooxauUtucxrZimt8rQELoXKLL7rMu4209Lo
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_SG2PR06MB3159DF7B3D79BA2AA1876C74FCA40SG2PR06MB3159apcp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: hotmail.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-RMS-PersistedConsumerOrg: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 572bb42e-a16f-4b75-e71d-08d727b434fd
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-rms-persistedconsumerorg: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 23 Aug 2019 10:25:24.2470 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Internet
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HK2APC01HT106
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/-1naXqwIH_6yge8zV9YUe5palyU>
Subject: [spring] comments on draft-ali-6man-spring-srv6-oam-03
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: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 10:25:30 -0000

Dear authors and all,

Zhenqiang Li from China Mobile. Please consider the following comments.

1. Section 4.1.2.1, bullet 4, When node N4 receives the packet.
I think it is better to change "The packet gets punted to the ICMPv6 process for processing" to "The packet gets time-stamped and punted to the ICMPv6 process for processing".

2. Section 4.1.2.2, the last bullet.
The sentence "The ICMPv6 process at node N4 checks if its local SID (B:2:C31) is locally programmed or not and responds to the ICMPv6 Echo Request" should be "The ICMPv6 process at node N4 checks if its local SID (B:4:C52) is locally programmed or not and responds to the ICMPv6 Echo Request".

Since Flags.O=1 is used in this case, N4 should execute the local SID B:4:C52 after the execution of the pseudo-code specified in section 3.1.1. What is the proper behavior of N4 here?  Generate an ICMP parameter problem message to the Source with Error code "SR Upper-layer Header Error" according to section 4.3.1.2 of draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header-22?

To align with the bullets listed in section 4.1.2.1, we'd better add one new bullet here with the text "If the target SID is not locally programmed, N4 responses with the ICMPv6 message (Type:"SRv6 OAM (TBA)", Code: "SID not locally implemented (TBA)"); otherwise a success is returned".

3. Section 4.2.2.1, the last bullet.
I think it is better to change "The packet gets punted to the traceroute process for processing" to "The packet gets time-stamped and punted to the traceroute process for processing"

To align with the bullets listed in section 4.1.2.1, we'd better add one new bullet here with the text "If the target SID B:4:C52 is locally programmed, node N4 responses with the ICMPv6 message (Type: Destination unreachable, Code: Port Unreachable). If the target SID B:4:C52 is not a local SID, node N4 silently drops the traceroute probe".

4. Section 4.2.2.2, the last bullet.
The sentence "The traceroute process at node N4 checks if its local SID (B:2:C31) is locally programmed" should be "The traceroute process at node N4 checks if its local SID (B:4:C52) is locally programmed".

Since Flags.O=1 is used in this case, N4 should execute the local SID B:4:C52 after the execution of the pseudo-code specified in section 3.1.1. What is the proper behavior of N4 here?  Generate an ICMP parameter problem message to the Source with Error code "SR Upper-layer Header Error" according to section 4.3.1.2 of draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header-22?

To align with the bullets listed in section 4.1.2.1, we'd better split this bullet into two.

5. Figure 5
The SL for the response from 2001:DB8:1:2:21:: should be 1. The SL for the response from 2001:DB8:3:4::41:: should be 0.

6. Section 6.2
Don't we need to define PSP and USP for END.OP and END.OTP?

My pleasure to work together to move this draft forward.

Best Regards,
Zhenqiang Li
________________________________
li_zhenqiang@hotmail.com