Re: [spring] Question about SRv6 Insert function

"Darren Dukes (ddukes)" <ddukes@cisco.com> Thu, 05 September 2019 19:58 UTC

Return-Path: <ddukes@cisco.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 A4B3A120B1F; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 12:58:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -11.165
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.165 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS=3.335, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=hAUIAUOt; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=s1YDqVkc
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 zHE1Ogi4hn6B; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 12:58:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-6.cisco.com (alln-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.142.93]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1E62120271; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 12:58:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=5864; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1567713498; x=1568923098; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=nHfxNbc3qA8ch6Y8WDqAIleVdIeSy1+pquLiJSPL5xk=; b=hAUIAUOtV12+5Bt2/S7uABIktIVTd6zcjIcecZnW0dArmQ4WSO+9O0/i sRsXA51bZR/IA+h+3hUp2j3Pxy5g1hkSuSorGpHpD3v0/zESROJFlvF0A f8IdCSECaxIO9K5mrs2sTFwbgeKga09N13hZdGapXloTtWW7KMOf+hVoV w=;
IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3AgFezgRYl4q7yyQBXKgrCX9r/LSx94ef9IxIV55?= =?us-ascii?q?w7irlHbqWk+dH4MVfC4el20Q6bRp3VvvRDjeee87vtX2AN+96giDgDa9QNMn?= =?us-ascii?q?1NksAKh0olCc+BB1f8KavmYzE5Ed9qX15+9Hb9Ok9QS47z?=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AUAAB/aHFd/5xdJa1lGgEBAQEBAgE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEHAgEBAQGBVQMBAQEBCwGBRFADbVYgBAsqCoQXg0cDinSCXJdsgS6BJAN?= =?us-ascii?q?UCQEBAQwBARgNCAIBAYN6RQIXgh8jNgcOAgMJAQEEAQEBAgEGBG2FLgyFSgE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQECAQEBEBERDAEBLAsBBAsCAQgOBwECAgIjAwICAiULFAEQAgQOBSKDAAG?= =?us-ascii?q?BagMODwECDKAXAoE4iGFzgTKCfQEBBYEyAYEUgk4YghYDBoEMKAGEf4Z4GIF?= =?us-ascii?q?AP4ERJx+CTD6CYQEBAgGBPgEBgymCWIx+gjiFRYIOlSsKgh+Gd41xG4I0hzy?= =?us-ascii?q?PBo8yhkWQYAIEAgQFAg4BAQWBWQ0kgVhwFTsqAYJBgkIMF4NPhRSFPgFzAYE?= =?us-ascii?q?oi16BIgGBIgEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.64,471,1559520000"; d="scan'208";a="332195805"
Received: from rcdn-core-5.cisco.com ([173.37.93.156]) by alln-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 05 Sep 2019 19:58:17 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-008.cisco.com (xch-aln-008.cisco.com [173.36.7.18]) by rcdn-core-5.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x85JwHfC003736 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 5 Sep 2019 19:58:17 GMT
Received: from xhs-rtp-003.cisco.com (64.101.210.230) by XCH-ALN-008.cisco.com (173.36.7.18) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:58:17 -0500
Received: from xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) by xhs-rtp-003.cisco.com (64.101.210.230) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 15:58:16 -0400
Received: from NAM01-BN3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (72.163.14.9) by xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:58:16 -0500
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=SrSvflxqTi6NyMZyOk98ci1Pp/3exY25gdvGOuBM0/oNJyL805NOgLcNw+f700clDnlITBni/WPIYE0+CVeFBFuUMvar3xzqpyPemr6oJWMi31e/sAbIdEagD0dutHwH/ng4iliEL19vwU1ehPkczk4ZeiQ3joiqYaVCNRVe8Jfm6Dy7OVrljQUfNWBisvQCVky5Hx7AVWpymhB4665PHYBdYbE+LXMblLT02zmW+CJ4K9If3uhCkEZmK9lu4aAiajEHCG+1hIXuCfOYFEE32Wm3erv2v1w86NsisRM8IS+fi8JObg0x+N63Tnkx1ixeEUlPPpHvJFiAZpOk4lGDHA==
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=nHfxNbc3qA8ch6Y8WDqAIleVdIeSy1+pquLiJSPL5xk=; b=WCGX+8c0u1cgLmaS0kB5/fdKqrtp9sPbTzsUU6GRn2LqYVDKPWJ5OKoE2xA3epKya316pGLj2N4joqzEKDaj7cYZg8An/4gEmXAyEBFtAsNMDcxVhTnwF3vlFiB25nVAJiILODiRcKvJ0YbPqArSCI+sLj0g/ewhkFaATWuEbJL32cD/4NDOl4kA/GnH078UHGbYP5cA6O+HCwk5vPDIMx+GL0Eh0lBh3x6OOFtGJ6Pl6oLx9aii/gWc0AXHW9R8bUF8BlRtNLXEYIWIRSVOj9x+e+ine507kdKw4abkcetRBX9tiJxPymjMKhSeIQYNzWS/BQkDUKMxEFoa13g3aA==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=nHfxNbc3qA8ch6Y8WDqAIleVdIeSy1+pquLiJSPL5xk=; b=s1YDqVkc74XAfav2C2Pc2M9ugRrBrt0RwtVfSX5NqC9pW9Vdl6EaB2yO4rGKpd49zmDfk/WWHI/1RiCj3tkvzu6ElSFyQ2QGz7Cbohr2iJfdvt2cxl4hWfKEr6gL0sTmxzt3iWryW+qaOC44fVDkFZ8HY0X5evJOGxIRw88sxtg=
Received: from DM6PR11MB2603.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (20.176.99.21) by DM6PR11MB3209.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (20.176.120.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2220.21; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 19:58:13 +0000
Received: from DM6PR11MB2603.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::d9ce:baa:b980:e9a2]) by DM6PR11MB2603.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::d9ce:baa:b980:e9a2%3]) with mapi id 15.20.2220.013; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 19:58:13 +0000
From: "Darren Dukes (ddukes)" <ddukes@cisco.com>
To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
CC: "spring@ietf.org" <spring@ietf.org>, "6man@ietf.org" <6man@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [spring] Question about SRv6 Insert function
Thread-Index: AQHVXxis/gF6F9KunkOxVqkDbflgtacT7YMwgAFf0ICAA0V6AIABQWiAgANe6oCAAAKegIAAVJAA
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 19:58:13 +0000
Message-ID: <A6FA74AC-F349-4F01-A86A-949870134779@cisco.com>
References: <HK0PR03MB3970C6DCC635E7CD802D65FDFCBD0@HK0PR03MB3970.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com> <BYAPR05MB54636A2332FED916A26A6F14AEBD0@BYAPR05MB5463.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <3e31873a-278a-2154-0e71-4d820bba323d@gont.com.ar> <4012D854-2F10-4476-951D-FFFE73C5083C@gmail.com> <cb2f56f8-acdc-d68d-0878-9609cb3d7b1b@gont.com.ar> <28214_1567694772_5D711FB4_28214_238_1_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A48BFA9F3@OPEXCAUBM43.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <b83a7060-0517-c6ad-f6b0-bc9e61e4667f@si6networks.com>
In-Reply-To: <b83a7060-0517-c6ad-f6b0-bc9e61e4667f@si6networks.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=ddukes@cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [72.142.19.206]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: cd1b83f9-ab24-4a9c-2ce6-08d7323b627c
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600166)(711020)(4605104)(1401327)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:DM6PR11MB3209;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM6PR11MB3209:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 3
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DM6PR11MB320958F2A92390DD9829C064C8BB0@DM6PR11MB3209.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:8882;
x-forefront-prvs: 015114592F
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(376002)(346002)(396003)(366004)(136003)(39860400002)(199004)(189003)(446003)(11346002)(186003)(478600001)(99286004)(66066001)(26005)(81166006)(6506007)(81156014)(53546011)(14444005)(256004)(8676002)(476003)(5660300002)(966005)(66476007)(66556008)(66946007)(102836004)(2616005)(66574012)(486006)(2906002)(14454004)(316002)(8936002)(76176011)(6116002)(6486002)(33656002)(6306002)(53936002)(229853002)(6916009)(4326008)(6512007)(71200400001)(71190400001)(36756003)(305945005)(6436002)(6246003)(7736002)(25786009)(91956017)(76116006)(86362001)(66446008)(64756008)(3846002)(54906003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:DM6PR11MB3209; H:DM6PR11MB2603.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: QqATtpMCn9up+uBXXV2GCi4ijWNFkUufnXzQpvn/Vb19JOXH8lHqyY7O/kGXDaSpxx7h236dKX87/mvtu/aOTltId5dKbuNzcHyklw6e9/sukpl20mc8pTnBDP0ECv7Rm9C8WGKS8siWnbfCVwbkfnQlnigJ6cKmwHyWi1I6PbMCx2qrANbITrPJVIBvNp607IeZbnc4Z8trHsdRfiEbsOY7KMKJDEYbdkLopxKJQTaUqnUbUxj/vsSUD7XPjDf95JGTnCMMSI7cUU4INuhBG3H+3pFO4fFKY+OPGN8xifuasFcBLxzaAJx3s0Jf1m/gKreKA0rgpuOD6vDM7AZuGVpV8kbAW7GpcUSCnBHL4qxGOYs37a/NwjIbJGIVK/xCjwygZVeihH0aWtuIiwX1vYe81MSTX1xN5FrmgMSEIWs=
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <BFCDEFE294F5CE4AA613EF19B4EB472F@namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: cd1b83f9-ab24-4a9c-2ce6-08d7323b627c
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 05 Sep 2019 19:58:13.2049 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: F3alIWgXl86HSonxJsOAYZXBlo1sz+MznQY4KPxtJC2edLIn6l6Ju9nW3Jv5721AvSmOOLvydzNUEdWkMya+8A==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM6PR11MB3209
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.18, xch-aln-008.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-5.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/lBFGz1UtJR27hjKG4hBbTJYVPGE>
Subject: Re: [spring] Question about SRv6 Insert function
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: Thu, 05 Sep 2019 19:58:22 -0000

Hey Fernando, since you’re lost, here are some more waypoints to help you find your way ;)

- draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming mentions SRH insertion in only 2 of 39 SID behaviors - i.e. it’s a small part of the draft, and all insert variants have an encapsulation variant defined.

- At IETF 101, the 6man WG confirmed that SRH insertion must be worked on before draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming can progress to RFC - i.e. there are not surprises anywhere.

- draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming added a normative reference to draft-voyer-6man-extension-header-insertion to document that fact.

Darren

> On Sep 5, 2019, at 10:55 AM, Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> wrote:
> 
> On 5/9/19 17:46, bruno.decraene@orange.com wrote:
>> Fernando,
>> 
>> 
>>> From: spring [mailto:spring-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Fernando Gont
>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 3, 2019 1:18 PM
>>> 
>>> Hello, Suresh,
>>> 
>>> On 2/9/19 19:07, Suresh Krishnan wrote:
>>> [....]
>>>>>> So, we should probably explore the motivation for Option 2). If the
>>>>>> motivation is not sufficient, we should probably standardize on Option 1.
>>>>> 
>>>>> My argument would be:
>>>>> Folks would do whatever they please with 1). If somehow they feel the
>>>>> need to do 2), they should *refrain from even suggesting it*, post an
>>>>> internet draft that proposes to update RFC8200 to allow for the
>>>>> insertion of EHs, wait for that to be adopted and published, and only
>>>>> then suggest to do EH insertion.
>>>> 
>>>> I have put down my thoughts on the future of header insertion work in a
>>>> mail to the 6man list in May 2017. The mail can be found below
>>>> 
>>>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/4MevopH9_iQglUizhoT5Rl-TjRc
>>> 
>>> This seems e bit misleading. What I would expect is that before any work
>>> is published on EH-insertion, the IPv6 standard is updated to allow for
>>> EH insertion. (plese see bellow)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>> P.S.: Given the amount of discussion there has been on this topic in the
>>>>> context of RFC8200, I'd like to hope that there's no draft-ietf document
>>>>> suggesting EH-insertion or, if there is, the relevant ADs and chairs
>>>>> make sure that's not the case anymore.
>>>> 
>>>> Yes. If a draft violates RFC8200 and it hits the IESG for evaluation, I
>>>> will certainly hold a DISCUSS position until the violations are fixed.
>>> 
>>> Since there have been plenty of attempts to do EH insertion or leave the
>>> IPv6 standard ambiguous in this respect, and the IETF has had consensus
>>> that EH insertion is not allowed, I think it would be bad, wastefull,
>>> tricky, and even dangerous to let a document go through the whole
>>> publication process, and just rely on the AD to keep the "DISCUSS"
>>> button pressed.
>> 
>> draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming has a normative reference to [I-D.voyer-6man-extension-header-insertion]
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-01#section-13.1
>> 
>> As such, from a process standpoint, it would not going to be published before [I-D.voyer-6man-extension-header-insertion] be itself published as RFC. And from its name, the latter is intended to be discussed and within control of the 6MAN WG. So I don't think that we can say that it "just rely on the AD to keep the "DISCUSS" button pressed."
>> 
>> In my mind, this should also be a clear indication that the question of header insertion is (to be) within the control of the 6MAN WG. But you may have a different opinion.
> 
> Maybe my mental algorithm has a bug, but: what's the point of spring
> working on a document that relies on something that 6man has so far
> rejected?
> 
> You spend energy on the document and then... just sit on the I-D to see
> if 6man adopts voyer-6man-extension-header-insertion? Ship the document
> to the IESG for them to review? -- I'm lost, sorry.
> 
> -- 
> Fernando Gont
> SI6 Networks
> e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com
> PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> spring mailing list
> spring@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring