+1 - I agree with Dirk and others. The industry has been working on SRv6 for multiple years with technology being quite mature.
The requirements listed in the appendix are fully justified from a technical and deployment point of view. I support the requirements based on the SRv6 control plane and data plane existing standards and works well with or without compression. Gaurav > On Nov 19, 2020, at 7:47 AM, Dirk Steinberg <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello SPRING WG, > > I have read the SRComp design team requirements draft > and would like to comment. > > I truly believe that a SID compression scheme MUST integrate into the > existing SRv6 framework. Otherwise it does not make much sense, > or said another way, it will not be a SID compression scheme for SRv6 > at all but another animal altogether. > > SID compression should be used where the use case justifies it, i.e. > strict path TE inside a given domain. Inter-Domain usage of SRv6, > especially end systems in data centers, may have different requirements > and thus decide to use uncompressed SRv6 SIDs. It is important that > a SID list that describes a service that spans across multiple domains > be able to contain both compressed and uncompressed SIDs. > Consequently, the same CP needs to support both compressed and > uncompressed SIDs. > > I am currently working on an architecture based on SRv6 for different > domains within a carrier network. These domains have different > requirements and also different hardware capabilities that may lead > to different designs for each subnetwork. But all these domains/ > subnetworks must be able to interoperate seamlessly based on SRv6 > standards, regardless of whether SID compression is used or not. > > Therefore I strongly agree that Appendix A should be part of the draft. > > I would also like to suggest another requirement: > IMHO the single biggest advantage that SRv6 has compared to > MPLS is aggregation (route summarization), something that is > absolutely not possible with MPLS labels (SIDs). > Aggregation (CIDR) is the very technology that has enabled the Internet > to scale and to become the worldwide internetwork that it is today. > In retrospect I believe the omission of aggregation has been the > biggest design mistake in MPLS -- but back then there were a lot > of other factors and the idea to use a very short tag for forwarding. > After all Tag Switching and MPLS were inspired from ATM > and within this context aggregation made no sense. > > Consequently I propose to add to the draft the requirement that the > SID compression scheme MUST be compatible with aggregation, > i.e. it must be possible to express the reachability of a given set of > SIDs (maybe in some domain or data center) using a summary prefix. > > Thanks and Cheers > Dirk > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 3:21 PM Ahmed Bashand <[email protected]> > wrote: >> I also agree that the requirements in Appendix A should be part of the >> draft. Having of existing standard as a basis greatly simplifies the >> development and deployment of any compression scheme >> >> >> >> Thanks >> >> >> Ahmed >> >> >> >> >> >> On 11/19/20 12:58 AM, Ran Pang(联通集团中国联通研究院-本部) wrote: >>> Hi Weiqiang and WG, >>> I read the draft and agree with the requirements specified in it.I >>> think the requirements in Appendix A should be part of the draft in the >>> next version. >>> China Unicom is working on a network evolution plan for SRv6 now, and >>> we have done some field trials based on SRv6. In order to maintain the >>> continuity of the functionality, we suggest the solution based on the SRv6 >>> standards. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Pang Ran >>> >>> From: 程伟强 >>> Date: 2020-11-15 23:27 >>> To: spring >>> CC: srcomp; [email protected] >>> Subject: [spring] Fw:New Version Notification for >>> draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement-01.txt >>> Hi Group, >>> >>> SR compression design team have submitted a new version of compression >>> requirement draft. >>> >>> Main changes as follows: >>> >>> - added 3 items about scalibility with agreement within the design team >>> >>> - added an appendix including 3 items without without unanimous consensus >>> within the design team >>> >>> - some minor text issue fixed >>> >>> Please review it and let us know your comments. >>> >>> >>> >>> BTW: We will have 1-hour session for the design team topic on Friday and >>> welcome to join us. >>> >>> >>> >>> B.R. >>> >>> Weiqiang on behalf of design team >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ----邮件原文---- >>> 发件人：internet-drafts <[email protected]> >>> 收件人：Weiqiang Cheng <[email protected]>,Sander Steffann >>> <[email protected]>,SJM Steffann <[email protected]> >>> 抄 送: (无) >>> 发送时间：2020-11-15 22:58:57 >>> 主题：New Version Notification for >>> draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement-01.txt >>> >>> >>> A new version of I-D, draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement-01.txt >>> has been successfully submitted by Weiqiang Cheng and posted to the >>> IETF repository. >>> >>> Name: draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement >>> Revision: 01 >>> Title: Compressed SRv6 SID List Requirements >>> Document date: 2020-11-13 >>> Group: Individual Submission >>> Pages: 13 >>> URL: >>> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement-01.txt >>> Status: >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement/ >>> Htmlized: >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement >>> Htmlized: >>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement-01 >>> Diff: >>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement-01 >>> >>> Abstract: >>> This document specifies requirements for solutions to compress SRv6 >>> SID lists. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission >>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. >>> >>> The IETF Secretariat >>> >>> >>> >>> Subject：New Version Notification for >>> draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement-01.txt >>> >>> >>> A new version of I-D, draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement-01.txt >>> has been successfully submitted by Weiqiang Cheng and posted to the >>> IETF repository. >>> >>> Name: draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement >>> Revision: 01 >>> Title: Compressed SRv6 SID List Requirements >>> Document date: 2020-11-13 >>> Group: Individual Submission >>> Pages: 13 >>> URL: >>> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement-01.txt >>> Status: >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement/ >>> Htmlized: >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement >>> Htmlized: >>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement-01 >>> Diff: >>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement-01 >>> >>> Abstract: >>> This document specifies requirements for solutions to compress SRv6 >>> SID lists. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission >>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. >>> >>> The IETF Secretariat >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> 如果您错误接收了该邮件，请通过电子邮件立即通知我们。请回复邮件到 >>> [email protected]，即可以退订此邮件。我们将立即将您的信息从我们的发送目录中删除。 If you have >>> received this email in error please notify us immediately by e-mail. Please >>> reply to [email protected] ,you can unsubscribe from this mail. We >>> will immediately remove your information from send catalogue of our. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> spring mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring >> _______________________________________________ >> spring mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring > _______________________________________________ > spring mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
