I think also including END.T which will select specific FIB, and the 4291-style IPv6 address may be in last SID entry in Last SRH of Packet, other SID may not be rfc429-style IPv6@;
-------------------------------------- Cheers ! WANG Weibin From: spring <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Ron Bonica Sent: 2019年10月18日 5:33 To: Pablo Camarillo (pcamaril) <[email protected]>; SPRING WG List <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming :Section 4.16.2 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]<mailto:[email protected]>> Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2019 5:45 AM 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 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
