I would add that the text about processing such things seems to me to be
the typical (and appropriate) use of the Postel Principle, from which we
can tell that the important part is the rule earlier in the text that
says that EHs occur once each, except for destination options which may
occur
Hi Med,
Thanks a lot for this. I am looking very forward to the discussion in the
working group whether/how we will export also the observed occurrences of
Routing Types. I believe with the continuous adoption of IPv6 and SRv6 this
work will become important to network operators.
Best wishes
Hi Rob,
I fully agree with your analysis.
The good news is that the WG still have the opportunity to address the multiple
EH occurrences case, and not specifically for the SRH case. FWIW,
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-boucadair-opsawg-ipfix-tcpo-v6eh-02.txt
defines this NEW IE:
==
Hi Rob,
[adding spring chairs as my comment is directly related to SRv6]
I did some digging on this from an SRv6 perspective, and no documents
explicitly prohibit using multiple SRH in a packet. However, it is also true
that no documents define what a node is supposed to do if it encounters
Hi,
I don't think that John's example is quite the same. The IPv6 packet header
format only has a space for a single source address and it is 16 bytes long.
Two source addresses or a 20-byte address is clearly an invalid IPv6 packet
because it doesn't match the IPv6 packet format.
But I
Dear Andrew,
Thanks a lot for the review and comment. The intent of the authors was never to
violate RFC 8200 but help the implementers of draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh
how to deal with multiple SRH by referencing to Section 8 of RFC 7011. However,
I understand from your feedback that
Dear Lars,
Thanks a lot for the review and comment. I addressed them in -14 version.
Htmlized:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh
Diff:
https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh-14
Best wishes
Thomas
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories. This Internet-Draft is a work item of the Operations and
Management Area Working Group (OPSAWG) WG of the IETF.
Title : Export of Segment Routing over IPv6 Information in IP Flow
Information Export
Hi Med,
Firstly – I need to second what John said below. Secondly, while we can agree
that IPFIX supporting this doesn’t violate the RFC – what it does do – is cater
explicitly for what I believe is a violation of RFC8200, and that is where I
have a problem.
While there could be *many*
Resending this cos somehow by autocomplete got mangled.
Adrian
-Original Message-
From: Adrian Farrel
Sent: 22 May 2023 09:59
To: 'ops...@ietf.com'
Cc: 'draft-ma-opsawg-ucl-...@ietf.org'
Subject: A review of draft-ma-opsawg-ucl-acl
Hi all,
I think that enhancing our ability to
Hi Med,
Not my DISCUSS, but… I did take a look at that thread earlier and found it
somewhat unsatisfying. In particular, I find it a little odd that we feel the
need to cover this particular out-of-spec behavior with IPFIX but not others —
to take some extreme examples, how would IPFIX handle
Hi Med,
Good point.
Omitting the IE would work as well.
Regards, Benoit
From:mohamed.boucadair
To:Thomas.Graf ;jgs
Cc:The IESG ;draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh
;opsawg-chairs
;opsawg
Date:2023-05-25 21:05:58
Subject:RE: John Scudder's Discuss on draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh-12:
(with
Hi Andrew,
(replying as the doc shepherd)
Éric raised a similar comment. I shared already some context about that
section: FYI, this point was discussed in the WG especially that there is no
SPING document that motivates/explains the use of multiple SRHs. Please check:
Hi Thomas,
Why sending a zero length array is needed especially that the decompression is
done at the data collector? Shouldn't this just work if srhIPv6Section is
omitted when there is no SRH?
Cheers,
Med
> -Message d'origine-
> De : thomas.g...@swisscom.com
> Envoyé : mercredi 24
Andrew Alston has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh-13: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refer
Lars Eggert has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh-13: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please
16 matches
Mail list logo
