Re: [spring] WGLC - draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming

[Andrew Alston <[e-mail]>]

Thanks Pablo – mistake om my part – and for this I apologise.

So just to confirm – can you confirm that with that text removed – you seen no issues using the additional EH’s as currently defined by other RFC’s in conjunction with this technology?  I ask this because considering that statement in the draft – I’d like some confirmation that this has been considered, and it is not just a removal of a piece of text

Thanks

Andrew


From: spring <[e-mail]> on behalf of "Pablo Camarillo (pcamaril)" <[e-mail]>
Date: Monday, 9 December 2019 at 18:20
To: Andrew Alston <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Cc: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [spring] WGLC - draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming

Andrew,

You seem to be reading an outdated version of the document.  That text (and the related restrictions) have been removed since version -02.

Please read the revision that is being last-called (-05) and let me know whether you have any comment.

Thanks,
Pablo.


From: Andrew Alston <[e-mail]>
Date: Friday, 6 December 2019 at 09:16
To: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Cc: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [spring] WGLC - draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming
Resent from: <[e-mail]>
Resent to: <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Resent date: Friday, 6 December 2019 at 09:16

In addition to the below,

In Section 2:

In this version of the document, we assume that there are no other
   extension headers than the SRH.  These will be lifted in future
   versions of the document.

If the document is going to last call – what future versions and are plans to lift these restrictions going to come to fruition before this goes to last call or in separate rfc’s that update this document?  This is of concern because it assumes that there is no hop-by-hop option header, no fragment header, no ESP header, no AH header, no MH header etc etc.  Effectively making the use of this incompatible with things explicitly defined in section 4 of RFC8200, and which may run foul of the working group charter which states that SPRING should be avoiding making changes which define things incompatible with existing deployments.


Thanks

Andrew





From: spring <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of [e-mail]
Sent: Friday, 6 December 2019 04:15
To: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]; draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [spring] WGLC - draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming

Hello Bruno and all,

I don't think the issues discussed again and again in the earlier iterations have been addressed in this version to be WGLCed.

Thanks for Durren's recap as follows.
[2019-09-06] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/7zMgIwEY9AipZCCGO9KnT2CGH3o<https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/7zMgIwEY9AipZCCGO9KnT2CGH3o>
[2019-09-27] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/4_Slu3kkHwduZZPFJJmRUkmoTVo<https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/4_Slu3kkHwduZZPFJJmRUkmoTVo>
[2019-10-14] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/u536YH4tv7kKRq_b9_x9gBYpO9c<https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/u536YH4tv7kKRq_b9_x9gBYpO9c>
[2019-10-21] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/4pikRli_HSECun9AbwfpmOF5KLI<https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/4pikRli_HSECun9AbwfpmOF5KLI>
[2019-12-04] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/oDWLbRDqKCaF5Xa-QvKY6mk_D5E<https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/oDWLbRDqKCaF5Xa-QvKY6mk_D5E>

And Ron's recap as follows.
- https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/MQLQNTzdkfHNbpwP99FV8UqUofY<https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/MQLQNTzdkfHNbpwP99FV8UqUofY>
- https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/trugWEW3n7Ubz7oayYwo6Qe_lGg<https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/trugWEW3n7Ubz7oayYwo6Qe_lGg>
- https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/wCcVWXqbjwZW9-pJmYgZ1gC8Xrk<https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/wCcVWXqbjwZW9-pJmYgZ1gC8Xrk>
- https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/oDWLbRDqKCaF5Xa-QvKY6mk_D5E<https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/oDWLbRDqKCaF5Xa-QvKY6mk_D5E>

Best Regards,
Zhenqiang Li
________________________________
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

From: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Date: 2019-12-06 01:15
To: 'SPRING WG List'<mailto:[e-mail]>
CC: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming<mailto:[e-mail]>
Subject: WGLC - draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming

Hello SPRING,



This email starts a two weeks Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming [1].



Please read this document if you haven't read the most recent version, and send your comments to the SPRING WG list, no later than December 20.



You may copy the 6MAN WG for IPv6 related comment, but consider not duplicating emails on the 6MAN mailing list for the comments which are only spring specifics.



If you are raising a point which you expect will be specifically debated on the mailing list, consider using a specific email/thread for this point.

This may help avoiding that the thread become specific to this point and that other points get forgotten (or that the thread get converted into parallel independent discussions)



Thank you,

Bruno



[1] https://tools.ietf..org/html/draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-05<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-05>




_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.

Thank you.