Re: [Srcomp] Meeting minutes July 7 2021

[[e-mail]]

Hi Darren,

For  6.  Conclusions:

   SRv6 Based

   o  CSID is SRv6 based, requiring no updates to existing SRv6
      standards, VSID and UIDSR require updates.  CRH is not strictly
      based on SRv6 but is able to provide equivalent functionality.
// How to identify "updates" ? In other threads of LSR WG, I have heard that the word "update" should be used cautiously. For compression schemes, is a new behavior (or flavor) regarded as "update" ? Is a new optional capability advertisement regarded as "update". If so, I believe all schemes require updates.

   SRv6 Functionality

   o  CSID supports SRv6 functionality.  CRH VSID and UID support SRv6
      functionality or equivalent with some new specifications.
//Similarly, I believe all schemes require new specifications.

Regards,
PSF


------------------原始邮件------------------
发件人：DarrenDukes(ddukes)
收件人：Darren Dukes (ddukes);[e-mail];
日 期 ：2021年07月09日 03:45
主 题 ：Re: [Srcomp] Meeting minutes July 7 2021
--
Srcomp mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/srcomp

Attached is revision 2 candidate 2 text and diffs.
Please review, Weiqiang will publish over the weekend.
Darren
On 2021-07-07, 10:22 AM, "Srcomp" <[e-mail]> wrote:
Resolved:
========
Draft text for Address planning section...
<NEW4
All compression mechanism provide the encapsulation saving described in Tables 1 and 2. CRH provides this encapsulation savings regardless of the IPv6 addressing scheme.  CSID adds a CSID container, or one compressed SID (END.X with XPS behavior), for each change in locator block in a segment list. VSID (via XPS behavior) and UIDSR add one compressed SID for each change in locator block in the segment list.
The xps behavior draws the new address block from the control plane. At the time of publication this control plane behavior is undefined. Therefore xps impact on the control plane is not  entirely understood. While it may be possible to define these mechanisms without impacting the control plane, specifications are not yet available
Actions:
=======
1 – Darren to email new analysis draft version to the srcomp email list for confirmation of NEW4. If no substantive comments then Weiqiang to publish a new version of the draft
2 – Chongfeng to check on editorial change for requirements document.  Darren to change the draft and email to srcomp email list as needed
3 – Weiqiang to prepare a summary text (and send to srcomp for review). It will be sent to the SPRING working group to describe the completion of the requirements and analysis draft, and for  the working group to proceed based on these. Ask next step for design team and drafts (i.e. adopt and publish as informational or not – perhaps wait some time for this - TBD).