On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 10:34 AM Robert Raszuk <[email protected]> wrote:
> Gyan, > > [Gyan] Spring WG -?? Because SRv6 uses the same IPv6 data plan as >>>> "Business as Usual" NORMAL IPv6 traffic use case of the "internet" so >>>> the an "SRv6 enabled router" that has the code that supports SRv6 has the >>>> software feature to perform the PSP & USP but lets say the packet hits a >>>> node that does not support SRv6 then the PSP & USP won't occur and all the >>>> EH headers inserted for SRv6 routing header type 4 will remain in the >>>> packet to the end destination. How do we deal with this issue. >>>> >>> > > It's not an issue so we do not need to "deal with it". > > SRv6 architecture operates just fine over non upgraded (read non SR aware) > IPv6 nodes. > > r. > Ok did a google but could not find a draft on that please forward. So I can see that is possible for intermediate nodes not necessary to be “SR aware” I get that but what about the PSP or USP node that removes the SRH EH header. I would think that functionality requires that node to be SRv6 aware. I looked on LSR WG and there is an SRv6 extension for ISIS and OSPF as I expected. So since there are extensions related to IGP goes back to my original question of SRv6 aware nodes. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions/ > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions/ > -- Gyan S. Mishra IT Network Engineering & Technology Verizon Communications Inc. (VZ) 13101 Columbia Pike FDC1 3rd Floor Silver Spring, MD 20904 United States Phone: 301 502-1347 Email: [email protected] www.linkedin.com/in/networking-technologies-consultant
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
