+1 As commented on the mike at the WG meeting, SRm6 being a *mapping* technique (that allocates IDs, distributes its state as IDs, and whose FIB is based these IDs and in which does ID swapping in the forwarding path), it is more appropriate to understand the genuine benefits of SRm6 over SR-MPLS IPv6 solutions. After all SR-MPLS was designed as a label mapping based source routing solution for both IPv4 and IPv6 control planes by the WG.
Thanks, Ketan From: spring <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Robert Raszuk Sent: 19 November 2019 04:53 To: Ron Bonica <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected]; SPRING WG <[email protected]>; Darren Dukes (ddukes) <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [spring] SRm6: Motivation? Hello Ron, In your generous offer would you mind to also include in your document not only advantages of SRm6 over SRv6 but also compare it with the below parallel solutions: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-filsfils-spring-sr-mpls-ipv6-control-plane-00 https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-agrawal-spring-srv6-mpls-interworking-00 and https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-raszuk-teas-ip-te-np-00 Kindest regards, Robert. On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 9:24 PM Ron Bonica <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi Darren, It's always good to hear from you. Even when we disagree, the conversation is always civil and thought provoking. I am glad to hear that you are open to arguments suggesting that your analysis might be incorrect. So, I accept your challenge to produce a document that describes the advantages of SRm6 over SRv6, as well as the differences between SRm6 and SRv6. Expect some operational hoarse-sense as well as some architectural deep-diving. While the document will include words on scale and performance, running code will provide the most reliable evidence. Happy holidays, Ron Juniper Business Use Only -----Original Message----- From: Darren Dukes (ddukes) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 2:24 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; SPRING WG <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: SRm6: Motivation? Hi Ron, to follow up on what was said at the mic. The current community analysis, comparing existing solutions (SRv6 and SR-MPLS for IPv6) with SRm6, had the following result: - a lot of differences (Architecture, Dataplane, Controlplane) and hence engineering cost - scale, performance and complexity drawbacks - no genuine advantage Hence, the very first thing you need to do is to clearly compare your solution with respect to SRv6 and SR-MPLS and demonstrate why the above analysis is incorrect. Only with such a logical analysis, will the community be able to judge whether this proposal should be pursued within SPRING. Thanks Darren _______________________________________________ spring mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
