Re: [Tsv-art] [v6ops] [Last-Call] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-05

Fernando Gont <> Sat, 20 February 2021 05:09 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 228E43A0F02; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 21:09:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.889
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.889 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_TEMPERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id amdrX_Kj3lxI; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 21:09:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B49F03A113A; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 21:09:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2800:810:464:2b9:cc90:3a89:34f0:5ee6] (unknown [IPv6:2800:810:464:2b9:cc90:3a89:34f0:5ee6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7B1D52801AA; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 05:09:33 +0000 (UTC)
To: Tom Herbert <>
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <>, Gorry Fairhurst <>,,,, IPv6 Operations <>
References: <> <> <> <> <>
From: Fernando Gont <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2021 02:07:41 -0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Tsv-art] [v6ops] [Last-Call] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-05
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Review Team <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2021 05:09:44 -0000

Hi, Tom,

On 19/2/21 18:13, Tom Herbert wrote:
[....]>> xor add this:
>>     [RFC7098] discusses how the IPv6 FLow Label can used to enhance layer
>>      3/4 (L3/4) load distribution and balancing for large server farms.
>> right after:
>>      Thus, ECMP and Hash-based Load-
>>      Sharing should be possible without the need to process the entire
>>      IPv6 header chain to obtain upper-layer information to identify
>>      flows.
> I don't why this is only a "should". 

This is not a requirement. We're mostly indicating possibility.

> Hashing of three tuple for load
> balancing works as described as evident by the fact it is in wide
> deployment (consider it's been in Linux stack for it's internal load
> balancing for several years and there's now over a billion devices in
> the world that do this).

LB based on the FL relies on:
* Appropriate implementation of the FL
* Use of the FL in load balancers

There has been (and still is) an interesting mix of cases where one or 
both of this simply do not happen.

See e.g.:

We're just the messenger here....

Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492