Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension Headers - implications from new development for EHs

Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com> Wed, 29 July 2020 09:10 UTC

Return-Path: <vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6E6C3A0898 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 02:10:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 u7VnGWY7hzZS for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 02:10:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 209E93A087B for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 02:10:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml735-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.107]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 897CD281C6539C07255; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 10:10:29 +0100 (IST)
Received: from msceml706-chm.china.huawei.com (10.219.141.145) by lhreml735-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.86) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1913.5; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 10:10:29 +0100
Received: from msceml703-chm.china.huawei.com (10.219.141.161) by msceml706-chm.china.huawei.com (10.219.141.145) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1913.5; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 12:10:28 +0300
Received: from msceml703-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.219.141.161]) by msceml703-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.219.141.161]) with mapi id 15.01.1913.007; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 12:10:28 +0300
From: Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com>
To: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
CC: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension Headers - implications from new development for EHs
Thread-Index: AdZlgjwDgVHUhPinS+eOMr7pZRr/2f//0gGA///HZLA=
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2020 09:10:28 +0000
Message-ID: <fd2398a5109e49a8adaa70895e43d552@huawei.com>
References: <d8d59ce07f7f4031a545ff6e24fdbb88@huawei.com> <20200729084351.GG2485@Space.Net>
In-Reply-To: <20200729084351.GG2485@Space.Net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.47.199.195]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="koi8-r"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/SfC4aA-VqOevXjRTea6t6DE3vcg>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension Headers - implications from new development for EHs
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2020 09:10:36 -0000

Hi Gert,
This approach is not universal. We need something better.
Some EHs (like APN6 or Network Token) do make sense only cross-border. Because source to attach EH is assumed outside of administrative domain. Just today was discussion about "how to make Alternative Marking cross-border".
Moreover, "business" by definition is between different legal entities. If all these new fancy features are not related to business - many people would be very sorry.
Eduard
-----Original Message-----
From: Gert Doering [mailto:gert@space.net] 
Sent: 29 июля 2020 г. 11:44
To: Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com>
Cc: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>om>; IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension Headers - implications from new development for EHs

Hi,

On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 08:26:34AM +0000, Vasilenko Eduard wrote:
> I am asking, because may be the question: what to do to mitigate anticipated problem?

Do not assume EHs will work outside a very well-defined scope (SRv6 is an example of "will work, because won't leave the network where needed").  If you start work with the goal "must work across the wild Internet", abandon the idea to do this with EH.

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
--
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                      Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14        Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                 HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444         USt-IdNr.: DE813185279