Re: [spring] Andrew Alston's Discuss on draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-20: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Andrew you assert that explicit null is a significant performance hit. Is that the case? The test for explicit null is skip label if label is zero with no need to look up the label in the main label table (which is very expensive). What do forwarders do here? I had assumed that they special

Re: [spring] [EXTERNAL] Re: Andrew Alston's Discuss on draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-20: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Stewart, Andrew and all, I concur with Stewart. RFC 4182 clearly states that if the IPv4 or IPv6 Explicit Null label is found at the top of the stack but is not the bottom-of-stack label, it must be popped, and the next label processed in the

Re: [spring] Andrew Alston's Discuss on draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-20: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Hi Stewart, So, let me try and articulate this better – My reading of 4182 (With Alexander referred to in a former email) is that if the explicit NULL is not BoS – it gets popped and the next label rises to the top and the “disposition of the packet” is based on the label that has now risen

Re: [spring] Andrew Alston's Discuss on draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-20: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Hi Andrew, Talking existing labels (Including Explicit Null and others) as existing implementation, in section 2, we have a paragraph to explain that processing PSID may have some performance impact. “ The addition of the PSID will require the egress to read and process the PSID label in

Re: [spring] Andrew Alston's Discuss on draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-20: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Hi Cheng, Andrew can confirm but I think the following additional text should satisfy his discuss: “Behavior relating to the use of explicit null directly preceding the PSID is undefined in this document.” Andrew, please confirm. Authors, please add this text to the document if there are no

Re: [spring] Andrew Alston's Discuss on draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-20: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

That works for me – especially considering the performance clause in section 2 (which following the update based on John’s discuss which seemed to link it to post stack performance hits is now adequate to address that) So yeah – if there are no objections, I’m good with Jim’s text Thanks

[spring] Andrew Alston's No Objection on draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-22: (with COMMENT)

Andrew Alston has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-22: 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

Re: [spring] Andrew Alston's Discuss on draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-20: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Thank you for your quick reply  Respect, Cheng From: Andrew Alston - IETF Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 3:19 PM To: Cheng Li ; James Guichard ; Stewart Bryant Cc: draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segm...@ietf.org; spring-cha...@ietf.org; spring@ietf.org; bruno.decra...@orange.com Subject:

Re: [spring] Andrew Alston's Discuss on draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-20: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Thanks Cheng, I’ve cleared the discuss ballot. Andrew Internal All Employees From: Cheng Li Date: Thursday, 30 November 2023 at 17:12 To: Andrew Alston - IETF , James Guichard , Stewart Bryant Cc: draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segm...@ietf.org , spring-cha...@ietf.org , spring@ietf.org ,

[spring] I-D Action: draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-22.txt

Internet-Draft draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-22.txt is now available. It is a work item of the Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) WG of the IETF. Title: Path Segment Identifier in MPLS Based Segment Routing Network Authors: Weiqiang Cheng Han Li

Re: [spring] Andrew Alston's Discuss on draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-20: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Updated. Thanks to Andrew and Jim. HTMLized: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment Diff: https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-22 Cheng From: Andrew Alston - IETF Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 2:58 PM To:

Re: [spring] Lars Eggert's No Objection on draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-20: (with COMMENT)

Hi Lars, Many thanks for your comments. Please see my reply inline. The comments are quite common among IESG members, I should try to avoid these common concerns in next draft  The draft has been updated to address your comments and Andrew comments together. Please check. HTMLized:

Re: [spring] [EXTERNAL] Re: Andrew Alston's Discuss on draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-20: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Hi Andrew, I agree with Stewart and Alexander. This is a common processing in MPLS, and nothing new is introduced to Path Segment since it is a normal local label. So I think we might no need to add text for this ? As suggested by Bruno, making clear that the Path Segment is a local label can

Re: [spring] [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-16

Stewart, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On Oct 25, 2023, at 16:37, Stewart Bryant via Datatracker > wrote: > > Reviewer: Stewart Bryant > Review result: Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area

Re: [spring] Andrew Alston's Discuss on draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-20: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Hi Andrew, Many thanks for your review and comments. Let me reply to your comments in this email and reply to your discuss later in another email. Please see inline. Respect, Cheng -Original Message- From: Andrew Alston via Datatracker Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 8:30 AM To:

[spring] I-D Action: draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-21.txt

Internet-Draft draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-21.txt is now available. It is a work item of the Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) WG of the IETF. Title: Path Segment Identifier in MPLS Based Segment Routing Network Authors: Weiqiang Cheng Han Li

Re: [spring] Andrew Alston's Discuss on draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-20: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Hi Andrew, We have updated the draft to address comments, please check. HTMLized: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment Diff: https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-21 Thanks, Cheng -Original Message-

[spring] Lars Eggert's No Objection on draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-20: (with COMMENT)

Lars Eggert has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-20: 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

Re: [spring] Andrew Alston's Discuss ondraft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-20: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Thanks a lot to Jim and Andrew.We will add the text.BRWeiqiang ---原始邮件--- 发件人: Andrew Alston - IETF 发送时间: 2023-11-30 21:58:27 收件人: James Guichard Cheng Li Stewart Bryant 抄送: "draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segm...@ietf.org" "spring-cha...@ietf.org" "spring@ietf.org"