[Srcomp] FW: [spring] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-filsfilscheng-spring-srv6-srh-compression-02#section-4.1.1

[Ron Bonica <[e-mail]>]

Folks,

It is very likely that our drafts will be adopted as WG documents. When that happens, we will be obliged to respond to both Gyan and Dhruv's comments.

Dhruv's comments will be relatively easy to address.

Gyan's comments may require us to:


  *   Update 2.2.1, 2.2.2, and Appendix A.2, doing one of the following:
     *   Stating that uSID and G-SID yield the same results
     *   Removing the C-SID column and replacing it with one column for NEXT-SID, one for REPLACE-SID, and one for NEXT-AND REPLACE.

                                                         Ron




Juniper Business Use Only
From: spring <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Gyan Mishra
Sent: Sunday, September 19, 2021 3:33 PM
To: SPRING WG <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: [spring] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-filsfilscheng-spring-srv6-srh-compression-02#section-4.1.1

[External Email. Be cautious of content]

Dear Authors

After having a few discussions on threads related to the SRv6 compression analysis draft results, as well as WG coming to consensus on a single SRv6 compression solution, a few critical questions have come up related to C-SID draft that requires clarification by the authors.

The C-SID draft has 3 compression solutions below and is a combination of the two drafts below which introduces 2 of the 3 compression solutions with the  C-SID draft introduction of yet a 3rd compression solution.

Which of the 3 C-SID draft compression solutions was included as part of the DT analysis draft results and conclusion?

This is a critical question that needs to be answered for clarification on the C-SID draft solution.

As the WG has consensus on a single solution we need to have clarification from the authors which of the 3 compression solutions was included in the analysis.

The three solutions are very different and all would yield different analysis results.

I understand the authors have called the each solution a endpoint flavor which I see from the IANA codepoint allocations, however each flavor is a different solution.

https://www.iana.org/assignments/segment-routing/segment-routing.xhtml<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.iana.org/assignments/segment-routing/segment-routing.xhtml__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!R0B6pAViSABWZmBH4-SXww1ADVegF_ITQcAaDE2uRj3X_yp03jFJNazo2_5Tm-TM$>

So the WG as stated would like a single solution so now we need feedback from the authors which of the three solutions or endpoint flavors was part of the DT analysis draft that the authors would like to put forward as the single compression solution.

C-SID is a combination of the two drafts below:

Combination of the two drafts below:

G-SID - Generalized SID "REPLACE-C-SID"
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-cl-spring-generalized-srv6-for-cmpr-03<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-cl-spring-generalized-srv6-for-cmpr-03__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!R0B6pAViSABWZmBH4-SXww1ADVegF_ITQcAaDE2uRj3X_yp03jFJNazo22DF65ru$>

SRv6 uSID micro-segment " NEXT-C-SID"
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-filsfils-spring-net-pgm-extension-srv6-usid-10<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-filsfils-spring-net-pgm-extension-srv6-usid-10__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!R0B6pAViSABWZmBH4-SXww1ADVegF_ITQcAaDE2uRj3X_yp03jFJNazo20Mp-nH6$>

Kind Regards

Gyan
--

[http://ss7.vzw.com/is/image/VerizonWireless/vz-logo-email]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.verizon.com/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!R0B6pAViSABWZmBH4-SXww1ADVegF_ITQcAaDE2uRj3X_yp03jFJNazo2yUYAfGk$>

Gyan Mishra

Network Solutions Architect

Email [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

M 301 502-1347