IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] LISP support for draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-00

otroan@employees.org Thu, 13 April 2017 09:44 UTC

Return-Path: <otroan@employees.org>
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 9B8A9131463 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Apr 2017 02:44:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=employees.org; domainkeys=pass (1024-bit key) header.from=otroan@employees.org header.d=employees.org
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 cliQkwGxfa1q for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Apr 2017 02:44:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from esa01.kjsl.com (esa01.kjsl.com [IPv6:2607:7c80:54:3::87]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 595CF13145F for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Apr 2017 02:44:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cowbell.employees.org ([198.137.202.74]) by esa01.kjsl.com with ESMTP; 13 Apr 2017 09:44:21 +0000
Received: from cowbell.employees.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cowbell.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D0F2D788D; Thu, 13 Apr 2017 02:44:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=employees.org; h=from :message-id:content-type:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to :cc:to:references; s=selector1; bh=bSplAD0g60zKzrVsg02kPKxPz54=; b= DwgmyOidaeyV1w+/ADyj7SFwuRhs2x8v7l0/14pXHgel4MDYQlMtIHBb2hHxo1uK h647+wuRrfJ2MscPSlcpNAEySYQ8KwuwpL4NwzpbV0xKzw1xg4vRqoqThSt4Z+p6 XAdxqZyQpge0/W7+AV+fiHzMNf+G0NsBxkTXFwyoVbM=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=employees.org; h=from :message-id:content-type:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to :cc:to:references; q=dns; s=selector1; b=fuXWzflLRSmcu7L84lsH9Dc mcH+h8aTJLmofHWdHpld7ACiRnuj+NVKXzS1Lj1vAZShwa5ra0xnZnyGgAesc9+e OJH/NkQ5v8cnqBBDJqmuJCmGYKhbZpqApfrALVJrYFqVID5W95pqlS7vDs6lqHPX XrDyCLCXrk2pmB69ruV0=
Received: from h.hanazo.no (77.16.76.254.tmi.telenormobil.no [77.16.76.254]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: otroan) by cowbell.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D3874D788A; Thu, 13 Apr 2017 02:44:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by h.hanazo.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 027C4A9A7A31; Thu, 13 Apr 2017 11:44:15 +0200 (CEST)
From: otroan@employees.org
Message-Id: <AF4B7A93-E5B7-4A74-AEBD-826385A07147@employees.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_46287733-CCB7-4F4C-B492-1C6CE6647BF1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2017 11:44:15 +0200
In-Reply-To: <0E84BD53-6022-4681-B8F8-7B64760D023A@consulintel.es>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
To: jordi.palet@consulintel.es
References: <D8F5C737-B01A-4EC8-9175-C4921C0CD69F@consulintel.es> <392D675B-73C4-40D3-81A8-A06907F5581D@employees.org> <3BBFC922-85BD-49B5-B39E-227F191BD48C@consulintel.es> <729244A1-E7AB-4BA0-8B39-A6122D2C32DB@employees.org> <CAD6AjGQyatWEOxCpnOn8H+SxG=BWM=cBPaXoON6vA7dj7TNqOQ@mail.gmail.com> <72F5C80C-DDB5-422E-8FEC-7D4157722780@consulintel.es> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DB19757@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <E181152D-C33F-418A-85BC-4F7829BEE16F@consulintel.es> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DB19CFE@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <E3C498E3-25FC-4612-B565-98818DB60AB8@consulintel.es> <ED7BCBE5-C124-4BB4-B42A-D857EC85E484@consulintel.es> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1704131022210.27978@uplift.swm.pp.se> <8F80DE9D-0677-4568-B211-9D79067BE22B@consulintel.es> <6772D740-0589-4B28-ACC2-252C6ACB8360@employees.org> <0E84BD53-6022-4681-B8F8-7B64760D023A@consulintel.es>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/bxK7zG4uRJsbjbiJqPBgI1-0e8k>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] LISP support for draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-00
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Thu, 13 Apr 2017 09:44:22 -0000

Jordi,

> Believe me, just try it.

Oh geez... You seem completely stuck with the implementations (Linux based) that you have tried.

> I’ve tried this with many CEs that had a “6rd” choice and NO “6in4”. If you use the configured tunnel end-point parameters to “lie” to the CE, it just works. And this is normal if you look into the details of how 6to4, 6in4 configured tunnels and 6rd work. They do the same, the difference is at the “provider edge”.
> 
> The CE don’t “see” any difference between them.
> 
> In fact I’ve many customers using it, both residential and SMEs.

Take VPP for example. Does not behave like you think every implementation does:
https://git.fd.io/vpp/tree/src/plugins/sixrd

Ole

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email