EH insertion is not compliant with RFC8200. Equipment doing so cannot claim
compliance with RFC8200.

On Wed., 22 May 2019, 11:08 Rajesh M, <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Guys in this draft I see that all the example such as ping, traceroute to
> ipv6 address-> use SRH insertion rather than SRH encapsulation.
>
> This is intentionally done to reduce the packet size   (since underlying
> data can be only ipv6) ?
>
>
>
>
>
> Juniper Internal
>
> *From:* Rajesh M
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 3, 2019 1:06 PM
> *To:* [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
> *Cc:* SPRING WG <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Ron Bonica <
> [email protected]>
> *Subject:* draft-ali-6man-spring-srv6-oam-00
>
>
>
> Please find few comments on this draft
>
>
>
>    1. Section 3.1.1 , below must be Ref2
>
>
>
> *Ref1*: Hardware (microcode) just punts the packet. Software (slow path)
>
> implements the required OAM
>
> mechanism. Timestamp is not carried in the packet forwarded to the
>
> next hop.
>
>
>
>    1. 4.1.2.2, here it must be N2 (page 10)
>
>
>
> If the target SID is not locally programmed, *N4* responses with
>
> the ICMPv6 message (Type: "SRv6 OAM (TBA)", Code: "SID not
>
> locally implemented (TBA)"); otherwise a success is returned.
>
>
>
>    1. 4.1.2.2, here it must be B:4:C52 (page 11)
>
> The ICMPv6 process at node N4
>
> checks if its local SID (*B:2:C31*) is locally programmed or not
>
> and responds to the ICMPv6 Echo Request.
>
>
>
>    1. 4.3.2.2, here it must be B:4:C52 (page 16)
>
> The traceroute process at
>
> node N4 checks if its local SID (*B:2:C31*) is locally
>
> programmed.
>
>
>
> 5)  in below two cases is it B5:: or it must be A:5:: ?
>
> > ping A:5:: via segment-list B:2:C31, B:4:C52
>
> Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to *B5::,* timeout is 2 seconds:
>
> !!!!!
>
>
>
> > traceroute A:5:: via segment-list B:2:C31, B:4:C52
>
> Tracing the route to *B5::*
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Rajesh
>
>
>
>
>
> Juniper Internal
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> [email protected]
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring

Reply via email to