Hi Tom,

First, the VXLAN-GPE Next Protocol field would indicate the value 0x4 for
NSH (as specified in draft-quinn-vxlan-gpe-03).  Then, directly following
the VXLAN-GPE header would be an NSH header.  One would need to define a
new MD Type (not the SFC value of 0x1, specified in draft-quinn-nsh-03).
Then you need to make a decision as to whether you want to possibility of
your authentication value to be processed by hardware or only software.
If you want hardware support, then I would recommend that it not be
encoded as a TLV.  If you only care about software support, then you could
encode the authentication in a TLV using your own organization's TLV
Class, or perhaps an IETF TLV Class if you are standardizing it.  If you
expect hardware to parse and validate the VNI authentication, then I would
encode it somewhere within the 20 bytes following the base NSH header and
not in a TLV.

 - Larry

On 7/30/14 2:46 PM, "Tom Herbert" <[email protected]> wrote:

>> I think the intent of NSH is to be generic enough to work at different
>> layers.  The recent addition of the Metadata Type field in the NSH
>>header
>> allows for it to be used for purposes beyond SFC.  It could
>>theoretically
>> be used to essentially extend the header of the layer below it (e.g.
>> VXLAN/LISP).  e.g. I think this could be used for Tom to carry his 64
>>bit
>> VNI authentication.
>>
>I'd be interested to see exactly what the headers might look like in
>that case. I've tried to extrapolate from the SFC drafts how that
>might work but really don't see it...
>
>Thanks,
>Tom
>
>>  - Larry
>>
>>>Just like any other UDP application. If that packet needs to be
>>>encapsulated that is a lower level function. Just like IP packets can go
>>>in an MPLS based LSP.
>>>
>>>> picture?  They do mean something about how the packet is handled,
>>>>don't
>>>>they?
>>>
>>>I won't answer that because those bit introductions into the design are
>>>indeed design bugs IMO.
>>>
>>>Dino
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>nvo3 mailing list
>>>[email protected]
>>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
>>

_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp

Reply via email to