[spring] 答复: SRv6 compression

"Chengli (Cheng Li)" <c.l@huawei.com> Mon, 26 July 2021 20:19 UTC

Return-Path: <c.l@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D31A43A0CD9 for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Jul 2021 13:19:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.197
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.197 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jH_9L_LIl_Uz for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Jul 2021 13:19:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8EAAD3A0CD3 for <spring@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Jul 2021 13:19:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fraeml710-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown []) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4GYWHp126zz6H70b for <spring@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Jul 2021 04:10:14 +0800 (CST)
Received: from dggpemm500001.china.huawei.com ( by fraeml710-chm.china.huawei.com ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2176.2; Mon, 26 Jul 2021 22:19:22 +0200
Received: from dggpemm500003.china.huawei.com ( by dggpemm500001.china.huawei.com ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2176.2; Tue, 27 Jul 2021 04:19:20 +0800
Received: from dggpemm500003.china.huawei.com ([]) by dggpemm500003.china.huawei.com ([]) with mapi id 15.01.2176.012; Tue, 27 Jul 2021 04:19:20 +0800
From: "Chengli (Cheng Li)" <c.l@huawei.com>
To: Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>, "spring@ietf.org" <spring@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [spring] SRv6 compression
Thread-Index: AQHXglhfytTeGW9p00yjwekfj6U8aKtVrKJw
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2021 20:19:20 +0000
Message-ID: <5d5455b04065492285f44be4089f0cef@huawei.com>
References: <872DA8D9-BEAC-42A4-81FA-2F81604ADE9B@tony.li>
In-Reply-To: <872DA8D9-BEAC-42A4-81FA-2F81604ADE9B@tony.li>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/zUK5sAteYb3cN_R-N9dDLSFc3zI>
Subject: [spring] =?utf-8?b?562U5aSNOiAgU1J2NiBjb21wcmVzc2lvbg==?=
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, 26 Jul 2021 20:19:29 -0000

Hi Tony,

Thanks you for your comments!

For sure, our goal is not to deprecate SRv6 but solving the overhead issue of SRv6 so that we can use it better.
That is why we made the effort in the past year and even longer. I believe we do not need to state the effort we made in the past many years to finish the standard work of SRv6. People know that.

IMHO, what we(our customers and over 10 vendor partners) need is an SRv6-capatible solution that is built based on the existing SRv6 tech with minor update.

Sure, different solution may have their own standard way and I believe this can be handled by the WGs. I respect this.

That is also the point of a standards effort.


发件人: spring [mailto:spring-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Tony Li
发送时间: 2021年7月27日 3:56
收件人: spring@ietf.org
主题: [spring] SRv6 compression


The chairs ask that we opine on the mailing list, so I’m happy to kick things off.

As I noted within the WG meeting, my preference is that we deprecate SRv6. Compressing it then becomes moot and there is no issue.

Failing that, the WG needs to come to rough consensus on one mechanism.  That is the point of a standards effort.


spring mailing list