Re: [spring] Question about SRv6 Insert function

li zhenqiang <li_zhenqiang@hotmail.com> Mon, 02 September 2019 00:54 UTC

Return-Path: <li_zhenqiang@hotmail.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 A103B1200DF; Sun, 1 Sep 2019 17:54:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.125
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.125 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD2=0.874, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=hotmail.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 wv39XgTc93Cs; Sun, 1 Sep 2019 17:54:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from APC01-PU1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-oln040092254100.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.92.254.100]) (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 C776812003F; Sun, 1 Sep 2019 17:54:53 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=km6V62h3gxKUCcVA5iBJDuvD7cmobWXlJOp9NM/n6go1qDVAkw4LFapdwb2CwH+bUmLvOWHqtfCuHWpdDebx44/89tUsfRuKv3J7wWGtrdcwQc8Jly3xt45dMknySe7fUfTokJ+l4IzWCGTKbj4QOpOfAeCxEquzr5hO1jZz4/rurZy1PLB0uFhHqZp8MYgjn+ABh9y/QZNWuYLWNbeTIe6m2R1X37k68AZcmin3D2jtJc/XO5VA00T+Ib7LrDo/nsX6BozpMepjDsN9HDOmxszB6jti7ae0fBFza6s5NyV92SLFq8piEJAIQJ4BPJW3nFDyMfSOQ1RVbNO7vpDFug==
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=xwkSHTs9Ak0fhwPKcI8NCcBad/1c+RvKPbJ8049mZnI=; b=CPsHAOwedHayXGJ7d1lL0uI9IRKS1BzAS5A7M1MZ6sbjDYbDzAj4FjW97HaEXn/1wlYoX8e8p1qKXkjldMZOgE7d1V6/5A2TxdNTpcMjbVVNYCs2TRr1LDQHBoarc2WdKywdbIZQsaG+uK8dpH5MVfbNIpkuva9sb3W2N5o+f+bVUfxWhWwCo4qLqX43e+27te3fYGTcweyrgwrNdACvHMZZQX8VJBUUqOt3Hxll8y8wPAlxxAU9LfTfhoD4oNChvfFOUXyqNtDU53UJ2W42xinj+U5CQdgk88gsxS2qaBiYCX/9L6rwp2385QCef3VHvyjFOymeLZT9But7nbeMIw==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=none; dmarc=none; dkim=none; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hotmail.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=xwkSHTs9Ak0fhwPKcI8NCcBad/1c+RvKPbJ8049mZnI=; b=XXshJrif1mDzTa3xGv5q/yqJWMKn04MzbDeu9Iq/xOtTSCuGE2UPYGvR2yxAscbhKOpwYrxevCGtbPdlChExpR54FOenLVnuNsW9ujx4XvH8pTsuuTmh3Pbrd2TS7l8RCkrYnxco+hjwthUgBMjnVpj50/1qzYkBCt2NdOUl9tCXkDKwRBExoBNnCMoYmg25ElDWIZ46xE9+ygNZE7w8ZXz/UcNJ7NMRLtegl6Ql4jKH84xmZFmuXM03wutWYSDTbb39wH3W5uVA39FiMc+k/WoS9GzzjYBSwmmfMnodI+173m7WpkRxFiV8Lu38Iz5h3cCugU4LfDQn9YljOnrsUA==
Received: from HK2APC01FT039.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com (10.152.248.51) by HK2APC01HT203.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com (10.152.249.99) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2220.16; Mon, 2 Sep 2019 00:54:50 +0000
Received: from HK0PR03MB3970.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.152.248.55) by HK2APC01FT039.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.249.7) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2220.16 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 2 Sep 2019 00:54:50 +0000
Received: from HK0PR03MB3970.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::58ab:9421:d860:7c34]) by HK0PR03MB3970.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::58ab:9421:d860:7c34%6]) with mapi id 15.20.2241.006; Mon, 2 Sep 2019 00:54:50 +0000
From: li zhenqiang <li_zhenqiang@hotmail.com>
To: Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>, draft-voyer-6man-extension-header-insertion <draft-voyer-6man-extension-header-insertion@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming <draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming@ietf.org>, "6man@ietf.org" <6man@ietf.org>, "spring@ietf.org" <spring@ietf.org>
CC: "int-ads@ietf.org" <int-ads@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Re: Question about SRv6 Insert function
Thread-Index: AQHVXxis/gF6F9KunkOxVqkDbflgtQ==
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2019 00:54:50 +0000
Message-ID: <HK0PR03MB397061F3413D6739974ED2EAFCBE0@HK0PR03MB3970.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <HK0PR03MB3970C6DCC635E7CD802D65FDFCBD0@HK0PR03MB3970.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com>, <d8853fba-2fa0-a678-a60e-9b6e98aaddb1@gont.com.ar>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-clientproxiedby: HK2PR04CA0055.apcprd04.prod.outlook.com (2603:1096:202:14::23) To HK0PR03MB3970.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com (2603:1096:203:97::17)
x-incomingtopheadermarker: OriginalChecksum:36F2E6BB695299A3766EF8EEBAB657C0EAD1F32D8049D9C0D622DB4798C0A6F6; UpperCasedChecksum:620F94D41119862141E4CC972CCB3D7CC44F97B9E1AA9CCB63A707E621C0189F; SizeAsReceived:7741; Count:51
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-has-attach: no
x-mailer: Foxmail 7.2.9.156[cn]
x-tmn: [MgQtkg/bnzhXqz+FIgHLCZ0/gyY5n5ET]
x-microsoft-original-message-id: <2019090208544858721011@hotmail.com>
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-incomingheadercount: 51
x-eopattributedmessage: 0
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(5050001)(7020095)(20181119110)(201702061078)(5061506573)(5061507331)(1603103135)(2017031320274)(2017031322404)(2017031323274)(2017031324274)(1601125500)(1603101475)(1701031045); SRVR:HK2APC01HT203;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: HK2APC01HT203:
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: BhZpZgTkiKgCQzHgsjA7jmWqrK3GWHphtNSPD6fxKhHATNyc42rnQC2o1XipSjWCB5p7dZ7kUuAoBZD8HJDLwHnan0UHl5PTdLRiHUVGUPThdnbSmcnUSZHC5xd4uoakvuiQC0d4C1AykQ/uIDY+uwDp5pl3wcrz/EP/u9NSPXZHUQ6bnb6nt8WiWs1F6wHd
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_HK0PR03MB397061F3413D6739974ED2EAFCBE0HK0PR03MB3970apcp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: hotmail.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-RMS-PersistedConsumerOrg: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 6c639b8c-cf7e-483a-e32f-08d72f402881
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-rms-persistedconsumerorg: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 02 Sep 2019 00:54:50.5864 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Internet
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HK2APC01HT203
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/i2_g0_UhH-LOOjt3qxPZp2TfCAw>
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: Mon, 02 Sep 2019 00:54:57 -0000

Totally agree. After the intensive discussion and debates, we reached RFC 8200 which specifies one IPv6 packet header can only has one routing extension header and only the source or destionation node of a packet can do the EH  insertion operation.

I think the two documents are contradict with RFC8200.

Best Regards,
Zhenqiang Li
________________________________
li_zhenqiang@hotmail.com

From: Fernando Gont<mailto:fernando@gont.com.ar>
Date: 2019-08-31 22:02
To: li zhenqiang<mailto:li_zhenqiang@hotmail.com>; draft-voyer-6man-extension-header-insertion<mailto:draft-voyer-6man-extension-header-insertion@ietf.org>; draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming<mailto:draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming@ietf.org>; 6man@ietf.org<mailto:6man@ietf.org>; spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org>
CC: int-ads@ietf.org<mailto:int-ads@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Question about SRv6 Insert function
Folks,

There was a very significant discussion during the IETF LC to make it
crystal clear that IPv6 EHs cannot be inserted. This is clearly codified
in RFC8200.

Are the two documents referenced bellow going against the RFC8200 standard?

Thanks,
Fernando




On 30/8/19 12:52, li zhenqiang wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> End.B6.Insert specified in draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-01
> will insert a new SRH in the received IPv6 packet, which results in two
> SRHs in one IPv6 packet. It is contradict with RFC8200 that says Each
> extension header should occur at most once, except for the Destination
> Options header.
>
> In draft-voyer-6man-extension-header-insertion-06, an intermediate node
> executes the insert function to implement a sub-50 milliseconds FRR
> operation upon link failure. It is contradict with RFC8200 that
> says Extension headers (except for the Hop-by-Hop Options header) are
> not processed, inserted, or deleted by any node along a packet’s
> delivery path, until the packet reaches the node (or each of the set of
> nodes, in the case of multicast) identified in the Destination Address
> field of the IPv6 header.
>
> Best Regards,
> Zhenqiang Li
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> li_zhenqiang@hotmail.com
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>


--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1