I just realized reading this note from Greg that he was arguing for
something different than I understood. To that degree, I apologize to
Greg. My comments do not reflect on Greg's Unified SID work.
Yours,
Joel
PS: Greg, just so you know waht error I made, I connected U-SID with the
uSID drafts. Again, sorry, I misread and misunderstood your note. Yes,
you referenced your draft.
On 10/6/2019 11:29 AM, Greg Mirsky wrote:
Hi Joel,
thank you for reviewing U-SID draft. I'm looking forward to reading a
more detailed analysis.
Regards,
Greg
On Sat, Oct 5, 2019 at 8:18 PM Joel M. Halpern <j...@joelhalpern.com
<mailto:j...@joelhalpern.com>> wrote:
No Greg, uSID does not bring all the benefits of SRv6 while using
shorter SIDs.
It also violates the basic IP archtiecture really abdly.
Yours,
Joel
On 10/5/2019 7:44 PM, Greg Mirsky wrote:
> Hi Gyan,
> you're asking very good questions and your arguments are all
correct.
> But I think that now there are several proposals that address
what is
> considered the scalability issue of SRv6. Among these is the
Unified SID
> for SRv6
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mirsky-6man-unified-id-sr/>.
> U-SID benefits from all the advantages SRH provides while adding a
> higher density of SIDs thus allowing stricter path control.
>
> Regards,
> Greg
>
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 10:02 PM Gyan Mishra
<hayabusa...@gmail.com <mailto:hayabusa...@gmail.com>
> <mailto:hayabusa...@gmail.com <mailto:hayabusa...@gmail.com>>> wrote:
>
>
> In line possible answers
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 4, 2019, at 8:22 PM, Gyan Mishra
<hayabusa...@gmail.com <mailto:hayabusa...@gmail.com>
> <mailto:hayabusa...@gmail.com
<mailto:hayabusa...@gmail.com>>> wrote:
>
>>
>> Bess,
>>
>> What is the benefit of SRv6 over SR-MPLS for greenfield
>> deployments or existing mpls deployments.
>>
> I think I answered my own question but please chime in with your
> thoughts..
>
> This NANOG document talks about the state of TE with
providers and
> currently the big show stopper with SRv6 which removes it off the
> table as a possibility is the SID depth and larger packet
size given
> that customers are set to 9100 and the core is 9216 so when
adding
> in mpls overhead vpn labels and Ti-LFA EH insertion at PLR
node to
> PQ node that adding in the entire SID list for long TE paths that
> have huge SID depth makes SRv6 not viable at this point.
>
>
https://pc.nanog.org/static/published/meetings/NANOG73/1646/20180627_Gray_The_State_Of_v1.pdf
>
> For existing implementations it appears from my research a no
> brainer to go with SR-MPLS as that is a painless seamless
migration
> but SRv6 due to SID depth issues and given limited head room from
> customer MTU to the backbone MTU today we are over the limit
with
> larger SID depth for Ti-LFA paths or non protected paths. Until
> that is addressed SRv6 unfortunately may not get much
traction with
> service providers which I think due to the SRv6 issues
....uSID and
> SRv6+ may tend to be more viable and more attractive.
>
>
>
>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Gyan Mishra ____
>>
>> IT Network Engineering & Technology ____
>>
>> Verizon Communications Inc. (VZ)____
>>
>> 13101 Columbia Pike
>>
<https://www.google..com/maps/search/13101+Columbia+Pike?entry=gmail&source=g> FDC1
>> 3rd Floor____
>>
>> Silver Spring, MD 20904____
>>
>> United States____
>>
>> Phone: 301 502-1347 <tel:301%20502-1347>____
>>
>> Email: gyan.s.mis...@verizon.com
<mailto:gyan.s.mis...@verizon.com>
>> <mailto:gyan.s.mis...@verizon.com
<mailto:gyan.s.mis...@verizon.com>>____
>>
>> www.linkedin.com/in/GYAN-MISHRA-RS-SP-MPLS-IPV6-EXPERT
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/GYAN-MISHRA-RS-SP-MPLS-IPV6-EXPERT>
>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/GYAN-MISHRA-RS-SP-MPLS-IPV6-EXPERT>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
> _______________________________________________
> BESS mailing list
> BESS@ietf.org <mailto:BESS@ietf.org> <mailto:BESS@ietf.org
<mailto:BESS@ietf.org>>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> BESS mailing list
> BESS@ietf.org <mailto:BESS@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
>
_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
