Re: [spring] Question about SRv6 Insert function

[Robert Raszuk <[e-mail]>]

Ron,

> They remind us that draft-ietf-spring-network-programming are far from
maturity.

To me it actually highlights something quite contrary. It is that some
folks are pretty far from appreciating or even grasping the value of the
proposal.

In your other note you have extensively elaborated well on how to
effectively kill innovation in IETF. If we would be following your advice
there would be almost non documents which build on former work and update
former work.

But most importantly documenting something does not force anyone to
actually use it if they choose so. This entire smoke about header insertion
from what I have been told has some technical concerns about real source
awareness about say MTU issues. Well for one if I am doing insertion in my
network I better make sure I do not drop the packet based on the MTU. It is
so basic ... of course I must clean up when I fwd the packet to other
domain but this is basic network hygiene.

In the same time folks are happy to encap + add EHs, DOs etc ... on the
grounds that src of the encap will be in the packet. Is this sufficient ..
even if ICMP is sent to such src (domian ingress) I bet such domain ingress
will not notify the original packet src anyway. And with encap the packet
gets much bigger anyway.

But I was not part of v6 creators and I think I will keep it that way based
on that little thread we had here :)

Best,
R.