IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [spring] Is srv6 PSP a good idea

James Guichard <james.n.guichard@futurewei.com> Wed, 26 February 2020 13:44 UTC

Return-Path: <james.n.guichard@futurewei.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 DF3593A0B97 for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 05:44:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.089
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.089 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SPF_HELO_TEMPERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=futurewei.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 eTE5sOCQtrcH for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 05:44:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from NAM11-CO1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-co1nam11on2134.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.220.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C550A3A0AFB for <spring@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 05:44:32 -0800 (PST)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=jk4rMbObcy6XHlGBFxWmvF3ZGZ3HwOWGy60pUvmtKywvSWmsNJEyDewXVna20BZdgUjyPR8721PgQM3A4KXUu7FH+R7iRKrenEHqT6lLRqc6xmEI2WZLl2OGbVVLFa31a4zT0KfRpKSx+ZRbTBcc8a4X/vAvXI3arLELs4JZ07s1j+LT/NnneOaI9ytMDcWkSsR1yZTN0OBTcgKNwIBpopXsBcj+Kgh84l12VPtOro6hR1qglORGaDFuSSDtC/xsCRjSN8PJ8hmdAZQL9Cd+6riczlO2XJaFs/yAjC8s3VO7byQ+YMQFyVRnwHl+gGeiECN6IBI51W+vmKmJDqmxbA==
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=ZGK3eo128r/zNGMlKRTE6aAfWImLV5h11CShBiD1gp4=; b=Moku07oVZbXvfj4zyWRolEsHbQXWuAwmvEHR84nc8AUNGD5Ku0/jmQx6f/wteydhnqYg9r4+FkzdyTaInPMheVogyoBNcg4QuGBOAPKwx1vi2qiTYv6NWhEyJGDOaksrxgMe/UGsP0w67tJUzW3W0xp9CKHG0SJGIPCyyHIqGDLavSk2NneP2xthGgP0GrtLfebYT72oQQ8e308CxPMtlLZrbRpgwMo3Yfsx0C//TnFMuxt5ZDggLx71mYbLWAZKdxwZROQwLEpQveFCe+pSHYYFiJobPJq3iyIPIDNLke+gclqrW1mDzIPQGbppvdIYOfA7kZx3un7IU1I0SUn9rg==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=futurewei.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=futurewei.com; dkim=pass header.d=futurewei.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=Futurewei.com; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=ZGK3eo128r/zNGMlKRTE6aAfWImLV5h11CShBiD1gp4=; b=L3+N9/+I8nBm7sgF9zEAF+5A/whMt9DWqmG6A/T6cQWanhQyR1eOr6opy6GpCdb6kWMzcT/IGW0d/oh7VHuRtdnM4JksfndednYcotdhplEINi1n+YdEot8w8E6F0ZyEtqZ5IhvscFpY7ER1VRAuY2JhbuN0PeJv+loN4RkDSt0=
Received: from DM6PR13MB3066.namprd13.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:19d::18) by DM6PR13MB3051.namprd13.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:19c::17) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2750.6; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 13:44:30 +0000
Received: from DM6PR13MB3066.namprd13.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::ad27:afcc:1220:dc84]) by DM6PR13MB3066.namprd13.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::ad27:afcc:1220:dc84%7]) with mapi id 15.20.2772.012; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 13:44:30 +0000
From: James Guichard <james.n.guichard@futurewei.com>
To: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>, Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>
CC: "Xiejingrong (Jingrong)" <xiejingrong@huawei.com>, Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>, "spring@ietf.org" <spring@ietf.org>, "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>, "Pablo Camarillo (pcamaril)" <pcamaril@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [spring] Is srv6 PSP a good idea
Thread-Index: AQHV7DwvS4Q0oT+cs0qA24QzEcugrqgtO/QAgAAjXICAABMQgIAACpoA
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 13:44:30 +0000
Message-ID: <DM6PR13MB3066512DE097A10B06BA14D6D2EA0@DM6PR13MB3066.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
References: <5c2a4b36-0c59-709e-23eb-00f4aa1ce52f@joelhalpern.com> <9B89F4C2-5594-4D31-8893-21F3F4A0DF6C@cisco.com> <BN7PR05MB569969EE8D1929E7069E1BB0AE550@BN7PR05MB5699.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <58ED78D3-9E0C-4556-8853-8754B361DF6D@cisco.com> <BN7PR05MB5699D79B1FC40662EE9E95B6AE500@BN7PR05MB5699.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <81A30B25-9857-467E-85AE-1FE84B6F3197@cisco.com> <CAO42Z2zq0chKx08d10JBNkpa5e8J4MWAJWk+2Qs1DD7y_wkYUw@mail.gmail.com> <05981e2ea71c4b3083ed6e15c7e20641@huawei.com> <CAO42Z2wzk7W4_gy6j+sW=1z+xoyMMxsjnUbZkaf=jcG0zZqddg@mail.gmail.com> <CAOj+MMHE7XaWKSy=y5-0kz5aOT9vWgMCRmc=WURX12-LX1TOzg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOj+MMHE7XaWKSy=y5-0kz5aOT9vWgMCRmc=WURX12-LX1TOzg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=james.n.guichard@futurewei.com;
x-originating-ip: [12.47.130.3]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: ecb14ba5-7dcf-4797-8f7a-08d7bac2016e
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM6PR13MB3051:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DM6PR13MB30513376A5154D099D54E467D2EA0@DM6PR13MB3051.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:8882;
x-forefront-prvs: 0325F6C77B
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(4636009)(39850400004)(396003)(346002)(136003)(376002)(366004)(189003)(199004)(5660300002)(52536014)(6506007)(53546011)(66556008)(76116006)(64756008)(66476007)(66946007)(71200400001)(2906002)(316002)(110136005)(9686003)(81166006)(33656002)(55016002)(81156014)(8676002)(8936002)(478600001)(66446008)(7696005)(4326008)(86362001)(54906003)(186003)(26005); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DM6PR13MB3051; H:DM6PR13MB3066.namprd13.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: futurewei.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: iUKjtZAo/h4Ov642sCFOA6QhOb2FtnqPsI/BRa9aWCMtLWUFi5G1iSgKbZu/LYla4ZGbFWz2+3/lxSe56u6aN32bWILBx0Jl2fHfXt5Ex6mjsXIzsqsGOvSxF7RE+Qkjz8q4PD5f4Qikn28rwVlftib5fVj/ZrxvGJy6tdzIT7ISbiAHi6tWsvbkOL6ggMF7Z+Y7962nIWi3mQSmgSmCj0nhkK/BO4JSV441ydNfB1+hRu7CejCU1a3sNr4SNUGZA32F5cMFp1ZfuyPFlSL2MsX8mqoSCLT6bBIBhkTOCYvXCZVOAbf6XfLZcYLzw1D61oDuhWmrkZ1M8xntA91ze/jw0IKT0yGSWPnVLGU2lLi0ww7InWIy5BQ9VpFqPizMicga6pHWpBehJBNrUXGP+B2Kk+QY0z8oGIq4YZhO4tnFNrpEBGIrY9dKeo54hX3s
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: GEd+QmAPQZazRAq2t23ygiRb1MkhHw010czigXQQm9FrXwZJjPDzVlg776rzB0/RyWMUJrt/giKdCtfHznTjaEwzs5W5M8B8C/+XV/RvFHgV7AsZLpZLwEpBv86meL3P94CRo2yMB+wnzcHwaBEIrQ==
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DM6PR13MB3066512DE097A10B06BA14D6D2EA0DM6PR13MB3066namp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: Futurewei.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: ecb14ba5-7dcf-4797-8f7a-08d7bac2016e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 26 Feb 2020 13:44:30.5659 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 0fee8ff2-a3b2-4018-9c75-3a1d5591fedc
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: ji7ONRoc4HyviBH1jS+a9NnSqpEGCVy6VW4k2Jt6Bhww028q/lXAXvKwpIdmN320dYaKa/i5ySPJCGb31/mbhg==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM6PR13MB3051
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/9N1RAiLRNPqcYFimSmIROw4A4SQ>
Subject: Re: [spring] Is srv6 PSP a good idea
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: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 13:44:58 -0000

+1 and well said!

From: spring <spring-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Robert Raszuk
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2020 8:06 AM
To: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>
Cc: Xiejingrong (Jingrong) <xiejingrong@huawei.com>; Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>; spring@ietf.org; Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com>; Pablo Camarillo (pcamaril) <pcamaril@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [spring] Is srv6 PSP a good idea


> Somebody choosing not to use AH doesn't mean SPRING can ignore the IPv6 specifications.

I think it sure can and in fact it should.

See there is perhaps key misunderstanding here.

Regardless if folks agree or not with that SRv6 is a new data plane. SRv6 != IPv6 that's obvious.

It also does not attempt to *extend* IPv6. It reuses some IPv6 elements and makes sure non SRv6 nodes can treat the packets as vanilla IPv6, but that's it. With that in mind all of this going back and forth between SPRING and 6MAN to me is triggered by wrong positioning of SRv6 as a new transport.

Sure if SRv6 would be extending IPv6 then updates to RFC8200 would be needed - but here RFC8200 should at best be informative reference. I am not even sure why SRH needs to be 6MAN RFC. IETF is designed to build and improve prior art not be locked by it.

Cheers,
R.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email