Re: [Srcomp] Review REQ-8-01-INTERWORKING-DOMAINS-00
程伟强 <chengweiqiang@chinamobile.com> Mon, 12 October 2020 12:39 UTC
Return-Path: <chengweiqiang@chinamobile.com>
X-Original-To: srcomp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: srcomp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AFB43A145F for <srcomp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 05:39:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
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 KLxIi-RRiEf2 for <srcomp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 05:39:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cmccmta1.chinamobile.com (cmccmta1.chinamobile.com [221.176.66.79]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6E593A1463 for <srcomp@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 05:39:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from spf.mail.chinamobile.com (unknown[172.16.121.19]) by rmmx-syy-dmz-app01-12001 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2ee15f844e6fbb3-c8ce1; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 20:39:15 +0800 (CST)
X-RM-TRANSID: 2ee15f844e6fbb3-c8ce1
X-RM-SPAM-FLAG: 00000000
Received: from chengweiqiang@chinamobile.com ( [223.72.72.149] ) by ajax-webmail-syy-appsvr10-11010 (Richmail) with HTTP; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 20:39:14 +0800 (CST)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 20:39:14 +0800
From: 程伟强 <chengweiqiang@chinamobile.com>
To: "ddukes=40cisco.com" <ddukes=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, srcomp <srcomp@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <2b025f844d840b3-00020.Richmail.00008020948461019961@chinamobile.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_1123658_2036020180.1602506354734"
X-Priority: 3
X-RM-TRANSID: 2b025f844d840b3-00020
X-RM-OA-ENC-TYPE: 0
X-RM-FontColor: 0
X-CLIENT-INFO: X-TIMING=0&X-MASSSENT=0&X-SENSITIVE=0
X-Mailer: Richmail_Webapp(V2.2.26)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/srcomp/4al8dYcTGENmUoDCxD0Lp10pKPc>
Subject: Re: [Srcomp] Review REQ-8-01-INTERWORKING-DOMAINS-00
X-BeenThere: srcomp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <srcomp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/srcomp>, <mailto:srcomp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/srcomp/>
List-Post: <mailto:srcomp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:srcomp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/srcomp>, <mailto:srcomp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 12:39:34 -0000
Looks good!--------- Best Regards, Weiqiang ---邮件原文--- 发件人："Darren Dukes \\(ddukes\\)" <ddukes=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> 收件人：srcomp <srcomp@ietf.org> 抄送：(无) 发送时间：2020-10-12 20:27:46 主题：Re: [Srcomp] Review REQ-8-01-INTERWORKING-DOMAINS-00 Here is a proposal for this combination. REQ-8-20-IPv6-to-CompSRv6-00: Migration from IPv6 or SR MPLS to the compressed solution is deployment and not a topic for this section. It should be covered in section 4. For REQ-8-01-INTERWORKING-DOMAINS-00, REQ-8-20-SRv6-to-CompSRv6-00, and REQ-8-26-SPRING-SRV6-MIGRATION-01, these could be covered by the following single requirement... Description: The compression solution MUST support deployment in existing SRv6 networks. Rationale: SRv6 is supported by multiple products and deployed in multiple networks today. A compression solution that interoperates well with SRv6, as deployed, will reduce the overhead and simplify operations. For Network operators who would migrate to compressed SRv6, the move is expected to gradually occur over a period time, as they upgrade networks, domains, device families and software instances. Metric: A compliant compression solution provides the following Supports simultaneous deployment at a node with current SRv6 SIDs. Supports simultaneous deployment at a node with current SRv6 control plane. Supports simultaneous operation of current SRv6 paths with compressed paths. Supports paths consisting of compressed and non-compressed segments. Supports the behaviors in draft-ietf-spring-network-programming. Does not require removal of existing IPv6 planning. Darren -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Darren Dukes (ddukes) <ddukes@cisco.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 1:56 AM To: srcomp <srcomp@ietf.org> Subject: Re: Review REQ-8-01-INTERWORKING-DOMAINS-00 I think we may need to combine the following requirements into one or more new requirements that do not overlap and describe the requirements to transition from an SRv6 solution to a compression proposal. SRv6-to-CompSRv6 HET-SID-LIST INTERWORKING-DOMAINS SPRING-SRV6-MIGRATION Anything not related to that transition can be proposed in section 4 of the document. Let's discuss in the call. Darren -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Srcomp <srcomp-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Darren Dukes (ddukes) <ddukes=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 1:37 AM To: srcomp <srcomp@ietf.org> Subject: [Srcomp] Review REQ-8-01-INTERWORKING-DOMAINS-00 This requirement covers two different scenarios: 1 - transition to the compression solution from SRv6 2 - migration to the compression solution from IPv6/MPLS/anything else. I think the transition requirement is captured in HET-SID-LIST and can be duplicated to that The migration requirement should be split out and moved to section 4 since it is common to any SR instantiation for IPv6. Darren
- [Srcomp] Review REQ-8-01-INTERWORKING-DOMAINS-00 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: [Srcomp] Review REQ-8-01-INTERWORKING-DOMAINS… Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: [Srcomp] Review REQ-8-01-INTERWORKING-DOMAINS… 程伟强
- Re: [Srcomp] Review REQ-8-01-INTERWORKING-DOMAINS… Darren Dukes (ddukes)