Re: [spring] Fwd: IETF WG state changed for draft-ietf-spring-srv6-srh-compression

["Martin Vigoureux (Nokia)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

I support this document moving forward.

As part of the WG LC I'd like to suggest a minor clarification. Document 
explains the conditions the SID structure shall satisfy for compression 
to be feasible, which, in my view should not be confused with Segment 
List Validation (as per rfc9256). Please se a proposal below.

Thank you

-m

OLD:
===
6.1.  Segment Validation

    An SR source node MUST validate all SIDs defined in this document
    that it uses as part of a segment list, regardless of whether the
    segment list is explicitly configured, locally computed, or
    advertised by a controller (e.g., via BGP
    [I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy] or PCEP
    [I-D.ietf-pce-segment-routing-ipv6]).

    A SID of this document is valid if it is associated with a valid SID
    structure.

    The structure of a SID is valid if all the following conditions are
    met.

    *  The Locator-Block length is not 0.

    *  The sum of the Locator-Node length and Function length is not 0.

    *  The Argument length is equal to 128-LBL-LNL-FL.

    An SR source node MUST NOT include an invalid SID in a segment list.
    If an explicitly configured or advertised segment list (e.g., from a
    controller) contains an invalid SID, the segment list MUST be
    declared invalid ([RFC9256]).
===


NEW:
===
6.1.  Segment Validation for Compression

    As part of the compression process or as a preliminary step, the SR
    source node MUST validate the SID structure, if known, of each SID of
    this document in the segment list.  The SR source node does so
    regardless of whether the segment list is explicitly configured,
    locally computed, or advertised by a controller (e.g., via BGP
    [I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy] or PCEP
    [I-D.ietf-pce-segment-routing-ipv6]).

    A SID structure is valid for compression if it meets all the
    following conditions.

    *  The Locator-Block length is not 0.

    *  The sum of the Locator-Node length and Function length is not 0.

    *  The Argument length is equal to 128-LBL-LNL-FL.

    When compressing a segment list, the SR source node MUST treat an
    invalid SID structure as unknown, and treats the SID as
    incompressible.
===


Le 2024-01-22 à 15:28, Joel Halpern a écrit :
> 	
> CAUTION:This is an external email. Please be very careful when 
> clicking links or opening attachments. See the URL nok.it/ext for 
> additional information.
>
> (One of the other chairs pointed out that this had not gone to the 
> list.  So forwarding the announcement.)
>
> This tarts the WG last call on the above document.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Joel
>
>
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: 	IETF WG state changed for 
> draft-ietf-spring-srv6-srh-compression
> Resent-Date: 	Sun, 21 Jan 2024 11:25:02 -0800 (PST)
> Resent-From: 	[e-mail]
> Resent-To: 	[e-mail], [e-mail], 
> [e-mail], [e-mail]
> Date: 	Sun, 21 Jan 2024 11:25:02 -0800
> From: 	IETF Secretariat <[e-mail]>
> To: 	[e-mail], 
> [e-mail]
>
>
>
>
> The IETF WG state of draft-ietf-spring-srv6-srh-compression has been 
> changed
> to "In WG Last Call" from "WG Document" by Joel Halpern:
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-spring-srv6-srh-compression/
>
> Comment:
> This starts the WG last call for this document. Please comment with 
> support
> or opposition, and explanation of your perspective. Silence is not 
> consent,
> and just "support" or "oppose" is not helpful. This call will run through
> the end of Feb 4, 2024. Yours, Joel Halpern - responsible Spring co-chair
>
> PS: I would appreciate a document shepherd from the WG for the bnext 
> step. Email me if you are willing.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> spring mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring