Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59
Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net> Wed, 08 May 2019 19:44 UTC
Return-Path: <rbonica@juniper.net>
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 A78D51201BB; Wed, 8 May 2019 12:44:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.71
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.71 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_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=juniper.net
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 JFbuxULphIxD; Wed, 8 May 2019 12:44:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com [67.231.152.164]) (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 E836A1201CA; Wed, 8 May 2019 12:44:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0108160.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x48Jdenu019670; Wed, 8 May 2019 12:44:24 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=PPS1017; bh=p3JpPk4z2oS4B1vP5Qo/rpB0TsuxBLNXh6P/vENo4ng=; b=TJl5yCuL1mN8gqFrD5XyQp9KICv/rrUfCDhmhNb0fXhyBVM9nCq68Z6xDKFbwQ03j3u/ tP+Deuuzz9oneh4rGBt06nhc48axAS+sS/oCEB4N8RoggLIGPggUhm0LIsKBBRAb0YvS js+Hcf9zjbuMqsJy1QCMTxCaAD8MMjNRRNtVQckasphfbehK9to8GJ0e2OMNvoaWBMBT byqbqL5QzEoYhkloOQ3XIW8G0ZWn26kl/3NJtk5S01VYQQw2eOEM77Rnz1mF+DrpQ5pQ q0JHWvbTPrfTi2SMI6RBMGlYPU6eAP60HZT4sfokW7yLXtwTLUShFMjvMVG8AjpjARzk Yg==
Received: from nam02-sn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-sn1nam02lp2055.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.36.55]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2sc10p0fsd-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 08 May 2019 12:44:24 -0700
Received: from BYAPR05MB4245.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (20.176.252.26) by BYAPR05MB5525.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (20.177.186.78) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1878.19; Wed, 8 May 2019 19:44:13 +0000
Received: from BYAPR05MB4245.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::e1e7:cf02:f236:ab29]) by BYAPR05MB4245.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::e1e7:cf02:f236:ab29%7]) with mapi id 15.20.1878.019; Wed, 8 May 2019 19:44:13 +0000
From: Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>
To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
CC: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, Ole Trøan <otroan@employees.org>, SPRING WG <spring@ietf.org>, IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59
Thread-Index: AdUDo1cr1ntuHPleQoe8AvXX2JxkXgAgU5gAADSHkFAACAfBgAAcxCeAAAkV7AAAAcrPgAABRNiAAACWgYAAAMT+YAACcuQAAAEa+YAAAC7tMAAA8F+AAADjjVA=
Content-Class:
Date: Wed, 08 May 2019 19:44:12 +0000
Message-ID: <BYAPR05MB424586F490FAEB951EB7E39BAE320@BYAPR05MB4245.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
References: <BYAPR05MB4245988C3A47C3665BD91172AE300@BYAPR05MB4245.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <AA81898A-9E6C-4AD5-9629-4BA283378A79@cisco.com> <BYAPR05MB4245AEA785C959D29E4ECE61AE310@BYAPR05MB4245.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <58529f07-acfc-3678-5381-4ae271143a45@gmail.com> <94EF12FB-0598-4E76-9A60-0CF67096DD04@employees.org> <CALx6S360dJD4_YcqMMy9k8NOLNdy1UZPAzBNOw1WpAz6iYfWag@mail.gmail.com> <CAO42Z2wBL=h=MKLshKUJa4m6aqTSGn4XQgKao06wKvvreKpB8w@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S36q+7L7=7m_TgFJL5BN1ryM=9Kgb3sND1Rw+Pmza5OVYQ@mail.gmail.com> <DD003840-92D2-4878-B1CC-CDCB18FA527B@gmail.com> <BYAPR05MB42459C7A22F5AF2F1AB75CD1AE320@BYAPR05MB4245.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <B2E808BB-E995-4AEE-A9E4-8AA7F92E4939@employees.org> <1F74292B-B580-4EDE-B789-EBBEE7E6DBD9@gmail.com> <BYAPR05MB4245244E52999315F0E4F3E5AE320@BYAPR05MB4245.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <CALx6S35M3Sqyme0dmESXHT+07huAQ3ksMEt3H82umuba2ACaPQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALx6S35M3Sqyme0dmESXHT+07huAQ3ksMEt3H82umuba2ACaPQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
dlp-product: dlpe-windows
dlp-version: 11.1.100.23
dlp-reaction: no-action
msip_labels: MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_Enabled=True; MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_SiteId=bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4; MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_Owner=rbonica@juniper.net; MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_SetDate=2019-05-08T19:44:11.0882599Z; MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_Name=Juniper Internal; MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_Application=Microsoft Azure Information Protection; MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_Extended_MSFT_Method=Automatic; Sensitivity=Juniper Internal
x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.10]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: b65f864c-ce78-4639-4455-08d6d3ed8c19
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600141)(711020)(4605104)(4618075)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:BYAPR05MB5525;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BYAPR05MB5525:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BYAPR05MB5525CDD3922A856DB8A0E62AAE320@BYAPR05MB5525.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:7691;
x-forefront-prvs: 0031A0FFAF
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(366004)(396003)(346002)(39860400002)(136003)(376002)(189003)(13464003)(199004)(99286004)(2906002)(6246003)(68736007)(74316002)(5660300002)(6116002)(3846002)(966005)(76176011)(19627235002)(66574012)(25786009)(52536014)(4326008)(81166006)(14444005)(8936002)(256004)(229853002)(86362001)(476003)(478600001)(11346002)(66066001)(73956011)(76116006)(64756008)(66446008)(66556008)(66476007)(66946007)(186003)(26005)(316002)(7696005)(8676002)(486006)(81156014)(6916009)(53936002)(54906003)(71190400001)(71200400001)(55016002)(9686003)(305945005)(14454004)(446003)(33656002)(6506007)(53546011)(6306002)(6436002)(102836004)(7736002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BYAPR05MB5525; H:BYAPR05MB4245.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: HquVDrD72NxEb+sjwsPxIeIi5zACJ/i6hdR4CjwulOXj5IJ7L/sbFY5sh3pCiOsj42NCjkuq2Mg9V5pWkj8LiZGsuMUoQHe+DOT14DNXgIjvQsG5Ba4oKLhNCdpKdTxh4xEFp+vvE7/F81Gj+Ewa5eiKOSuhB899dJpLaz1RwoUyecglY4vJoygdZw3X2cqBrusKCVb27KraBJ6VW2f2KdfU8Nbw0e9AcDZtuXqIz8w3HWOE6OZ/F1waysSy27SpyZUFFAOolis4EHhjcYrX+feFA0Pz1ElkjsCz79jmEtm2hPjRNOlyrNmQDeRa3xmPSF105uIre1pF/EtNqr6UWk/lYnDoQ1WMZWx7xHnrbMbsnykoAizB7wscnexnfDsZ5gxPuQ5ETdMpmtExa+RwoAmPsuQKFZ3hGaiZH17KWFE=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: b65f864c-ce78-4639-4455-08d6d3ed8c19
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 08 May 2019 19:44:12.9640 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BYAPR05MB5525
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-05-08_11:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_notspam policy=outbound_spam score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1905080120
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/395J1wZYwTdX4srLE0KeowxNskU>
Subject: Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59
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, 08 May 2019 19:44:33 -0000
Tom, If the authors of the network programming draft are willing to impose the two-byte header between the SRH and the Ethernet frame, 97 works. I will let them speak for themselves regarding there willingness to do so. Ron Juniper Internal > -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> > Sent: Wednesday, May 8, 2019 3:17 PM > To: Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net> > Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>; Ole Trøan > <otroan@employees.org>; SPRING WG <spring@ietf.org>; IPv6 List > <ipv6@ietf.org> > Subject: Re: SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 > > On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 11:55 AM Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net> wrote: > > > > Bob, > > > > The value 97 is tempting, but it already has a meaning that is slightly > different from what the authors of draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network- > programming intend. According to RFC 3378, a value of 97 means that the > next header will be as depicted in Figure 2 of RFC 3378. > > > > Ron, > > The spring draft states: > > "If the outer header is pushed without SRH, then the DA must be a SID of type > End.DX2, End.DX2V, End.DT2U or End.DT2M and the next-header must be 59 > (IPv6 NoNextHeader). The received Ethernet frame follows the IPv6 header > and its extension headers." > > That describes Ethernet over IP encapsulation. > > RFC3378 states: > > "EtherIP datagrams contain a 16-bit header and a variable-length > encapsulated Ethernet or IEEE 802.3 frame that immediately follows IP fields." > > That also describes Ethernet in IP encapsulation. The only difference is the > presence of the two byte EtherIP header. As already mentioned this is > important for maintaining alignment of the encapslated Ethernet payload, and > is otherwise inconsequential overhead. > > So I don't see why EtherIP won't work here. Can you please clarify your > concern? > > Tom > > > > > > > Ron > > > > > > > > Non-Juniper > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 8, 2019 2:45 PM > > > To: Ole Trøan <otroan@employees.org> > > > Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>; Ron Bonica > > > <rbonica@juniper.net>; Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>; SPRING > WG > > > <spring@ietf.org>; IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org> > > > Subject: Re: SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 > > > > > > Ole, > > > > > > > On May 8, 2019, at 11:13 AM, Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org> > wrote: > > > > > > > > Ron, > > > > > > > >> <adding the SPRING mailing list, because this is a SPRING draft> > > > >> > > > >> Folks, > > > >> > > > >> Sections 4.4 through 4.12 of > > > >> draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming- > > > 00 define a set of SIDs that have the following things in common: > > > >> > > > >> - they are consumed by the egress node (SL == 0) > > > >> - they tell the egress node how to forward the payload into a VPN > > > >> > > > >> If the payload is IPv4, the next-header value in the SRH must be > > > >> IP4 (value > > > 4). > > > >> If the payload is IPv6, the next-header value in the SRH must be > > > >> IPv6 (value > > > 41). > > > >> If the payload is Ethernet, the next-header value in the SRH must > > > >> be No > > > Next Header (value 59). > > > >> > > > >> In the interest of consistency, we should probably allocate a new > > > >> next- > > > header value for Ethernet and use it. > > > > > > > > It's a fairly precious name space though. > > > > > > According to https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https- > > > 3A__www.iana.org_assignments_protocol-2Dnumbers_protocol- > > > 2Dnumbers.xhtml&d=DwIFaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK- > > > ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=Fch9FQ82sir-BoLx84hKuKwl- > > > > AWF2EfpHcAwrDThKP8&m=ZtmZfCpk7bYpJSSTREggt8Xm8yHpWgrVBTFHi5a > > > UtW4&s=Qir8baDHTQf5RGhmFCDSbGShFV8dE_dqL1reoBpkiUE&e= > > > > > > 143-252 Unassigned > > > > > > Seems like a lot left. Plus there are many that are clearly not > > > used anymore, so there isn’t a shortage. > > > > > > > > > > > > > What would a general IP stack do with an Ethernet frame? It's kind > > > > of a neat > > > feature that "IP processing terminates here". > > > > Or are we going to specify Ethernet over IP? > > > > > > Look at the the registry, it looks to me we have already > > > > > > 97 ETHERIP Ethernet-within-IP Encapsulation [RFC3378] > > > > > > From the abstract: > > > > > > EtherIP tunnels Ethernet and IEEE 802.3 media access > > > control frames in IP datagrams so that non-IP traffic can traverse an > > > IP internet. > > > > > > This be appropriate for SRv6 network programming. > > > > > > Bob > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Ole
- [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Ron Bonica
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Mark Smith
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Tom Herbert
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Xiejingrong
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Tom Herbert
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Mark Smith
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Mark Smith
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Ron Bonica
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Ron Bonica
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Tom Herbert
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Mark Smith
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Ron Bonica
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Tom Herbert
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Bob Hinden
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Stewart Bryant
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Mark Smith
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Pablo Camarillo (pcamaril)
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Mark Smith
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Tom Herbert
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Tom Herbert
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Ron Bonica
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Ron Bonica
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Ole Troan
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Sander Steffann
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Tom Herbert
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Bob Hinden
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Ron Bonica
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Ron Bonica
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Tom Herbert
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Ole Troan
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Ole Troan
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Ron Bonica
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Ron Bonica
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Ole Troan
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Ron Bonica
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Stewart Bryant
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Ole Troan
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Stewart Bryant
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Stewart Bryant
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Ole Troan
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Ole Troan
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Ole Troan
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 Ron Bonica
- Re: [spring] SRv6 Network Programming: ENH = 59 john leddy.net