Hi, Thanks for your response. Will have a look at them.
Best, Nan > -----Original Message----- > From: 杨术 <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, March 7, 2024 1:35 AM > To: gengnan <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: RE: RE: New Version Notification for > draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-src-routing-02.txt > > Hi, Nan, > > You can refer back to the following draft, and you can see that much work have > been done with IPv6 for src/dst routing. > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-baker-ipv6-isis-dst-src-routing-07 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-baker-rtgwg-src-dst-routing-use-ca > ses-02 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-baker-ipv6-ospf-dst-src-routing-03 > > Best, > Shu > > > -----原始邮件----- > > 发件人: gengnan <[email protected]> > > 发送时间:2024-03-05 11:20:37 (星期二) > > 收件人: 杨术 <[email protected]> > > 抄送: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > > 主题: RE: RE: New Version Notification for > > draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-src-routing-02.txt > > > > > 2) Things will be much simpler in IPv6 scenario than IPv4. > > Can you explain it more? > > > > Best, > > Nan > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: 杨术 <[email protected]> > > > Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2024 1:50 AM > > > To: gengnan <[email protected]> > > > Cc: 杨术 <[email protected]>; [email protected] > > > Subject: Re: RE: New Version Notification for > > > draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-src-routing-02.txt > > > > > > Hi, Nan, > > > > > > Thanks for the comments. > > > > > > Yes, we only consider IPv6 in our draft, because, 1) we only > > > implement and deploy the IPv6 version currently. 2) Things will be > > > much simpler in IPv6 scenario than IPv4. > > > > > > Best Regards, > > > > > > Shu > > > > > > > > > > -----原始邮件----- > > > > 发件人: gengnan <[email protected]> > > > > 发送时间:2024-03-03 18:31:55 (星期日) > > > > 收件人: 杨术 <[email protected]> > > > > 抄送: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > > > > 主题: RE: New Version Notification for > > > > draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-src-routing-02.txt > > > > > > > > Hi Shu, > > > > > > > > I had a quick look at the updated draft. A "source address table" > > > > in data-plane > > > can be useful in some cases. > > > > > > > > My basic question is why IPv4 is not in scope of this document, > > > > though the > > > Introduction section briefly mentions that it is due to the > > > consideration of implementation complexity. Is the dst-src-routing not > recommended for IPv4? > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Nan > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: rtgwg <[email protected]> On Behalf Of 杨术 > > > > Sent: Friday, March 1, 2024 1:32 AM > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > Subject: Fw: New Version Notification for > > > > draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-src-routing-02.txt > > > > > > > > Hi RTGWG, > > > > > > > > We have updated the src/dst routing draft, your comments are > welcomed! > > > > > > > > Best， > > > > > > > > Shu > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----原始邮件----- > > > > > 发件人: [email protected] > > > > > 发送时间:2024-01-31 23:49:47 (星期三) > > > > > 收件人: "Anton Smirnov" <[email protected]>, "David Lamparter" > > > > > <[email protected]>, "Jen Linkova" <[email protected]>, > > > > > "Mingwei Xu" <[email protected]>, "Shu Yang" > > > > > <[email protected]> > > > > > 主题: New Version Notification for > > > > > draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-src-routing-02.txt > > > > > > > > > > A new version of Internet-Draft > > > > > draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-src-routing-02.txt has been successfully > > > > > submitted by Shu Yang and posted to the IETF repository. > > > > > > > > > > Name: draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-src-routing > > > > > Revision: 02 > > > > > Title: Destination/Source Routing > > > > > Date: 2024-01-31 > > > > > Group: Individual Submission > > > > > Pages: 23 > > > > > URL: > > > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-src-routing- > > > 02.txt > > > > > Status: > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-src-routing > > > / > > > > > HTMLized: > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-src-ro > > > uting > > > > > Diff: > > > https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-sr > > > c-routing-02 > > > > > > > > > > Abstract: > > > > > > > > > > This note specifies using packets' source addresses in route > > > > > lookups > > > > > as additional qualifier to be used in hop-by-hop routing decisions. > > > > > This applies to IPv6 [RFC2460] in general with specific > > > > > considerations for routing protocol left for separate documents. > > > > > There is nothing precluding similar operation in IPv4, but this is > > > > > not in scope of this document. > > > > > > > > > > Note that destination/source routing, source/destination routing, > > > > > SADR, source-specific routing, source-sensitive routing, S/D > > > > > routing > > > > > and D/S routing are all used synonymously. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The IETF Secretariat > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > rtgwg mailing list > > > > [email protected] > > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > rtgwg mailing list > > > > [email protected] > > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg _______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
