Ron, The intent is to define SIDs and their processing as general as possible to accept whatever is received as per RFC8200. This is a reminder of that fact.
Cheers, Pablo. From: Ron Bonica <[email protected]> Date: Wednesday, 16 October 2019 at 01:43 To: "Pablo Camarillo (pcamaril)" <[email protected]>, SPRING WG List <[email protected]> Subject: RE: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-04: Section 2 Pablo, I am sure that you have read RFC 8200 carefully enough to have noticed the following text: “Each extension header should occur at most once, except for the Destination Options header, which should occur at most twice (once before a Routing header and once before the upper-layer header). This rule addresses the number of extension headers of any given type that can appear in a single packet. A packet that contains one IP header and two routing headers would violate this rule. You quote the following text, also from RFC 8200, omitting the final sentences: “IPv6 nodes must accept and attempt to process extension headers in any order and occurring any number of times in the same packet, except for the Hop-by-Hop Options header, which is restricted to appear immediately after an IPv6 header only. Nonetheless, it is strongly advised that sources of IPv6 packets adhere to the above recommended order until and unless subsequent specifications revise that recommendation.” Is it your intent to ignore the strong advice of RFC 8200 without offering any justification? Ron Juniper Business Use Only From: Pablo Camarillo (pcamaril) <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2019 12:45 PM To: Ron Bonica <[email protected]>; SPRING WG List <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-04: Section 2 Ron, That sentence is there on purpose. RFC8200: IPv6 nodes must accept and attempt to process extension headers in any order and occurring any number of times in the same packet I will update that sentence in the next revision of the draft to make it more formal and include the normative reference: “As per [RFC8200], multiple occurrences of the SRH might be present in the same IPv6 header.” Cheers, Pablo. From: spring <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of Ron Bonica <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Monday, 14 October 2019 at 20:28 To: SPRING WG List <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-04: Section 2 Authors, In Section 2 of draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-04, you say: “SRH: Segment Routing Header as defined in [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header]. We assume that the SRH may be present multiple times inside each packet.” Did you mean to remove the final sentence? Ron Juniper Business Use Only
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
