Pablo,
I see your point. An RFC 4291-style IPv6 address can replace END with USD, but
it can't replaced END.X with USD.
Ron
Juniper Business Use Only
From: Pablo Camarillo (pcamaril) <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2019 5:45 AM
To: Ron Bonica <[email protected]>; SPRING WG List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming :Section
4..16.2
Hi Ron,
Are you sure you get the same behavior with an interface address?
Can you please explain me how do you decapsulate and forward the inner
-encapsulated- IPv6 packet on a link with a high IGP metric when the packet
arrives with a DA=IPv6 interface address?
Thanks,
Pablo.
From: Ron Bonica <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Wednesday, 16 October 2019 at 01:59
To: "Pablo Camarillo (pcamaril)"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, SPRING WG List
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: RE: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming :Section
4..16.2
Pablo,
You haven't answered my question.
Why specify a USD flavor of END, END.X and END.T when you can get the exact
same behavior by populating SID[0] with an IPv6 address that identifies a real
interface?
USD seems redundant.
Ron
Juniper Business Use Only
From: Pablo Camarillo (pcamaril) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2019 12:45 PM
To: Ron Bonica <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; SPRING WG
List <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming :Section
4..16.2
Ron,
The USD flavour is used in any T.Encaps policy applied within the SR domain..
Cheers,
Pablo.
From: spring <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on
behalf of Ron Bonica
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Tuesday, 15 October 2019 at 01:03
To: SPRING WG List <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming :Section
4..16.2
Authors,
Sorry, I meant to say USD, not USP.
Ron
Juniper Business Use Only
From: Ron Bonica
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2019 2:36 PM
To: SPRING WG List <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming :Section 4.16.2
Authors,
The USP flavor of the END, END.X and END.T functions isn't needed.
USP is the default IPv6 behavior. So, if the source node specifies SID[0] as an
RFC 4291 address on the SR egress node, you get the USP behavior for free.
Ron
Juniper Business Use Only
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
