Hi Cheng

Again, Excellent work done by DT - Many Thanks!

Comments in-line

Gyan

On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 6:26 AM Chengli (Cheng Li) <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Gyan,
>
>
>
> Many thanks for your comments. Yes it is, we finished the work as
> required, really difficult.
>
>   Gyan> Yes very difficult job & well done

>
>
> I do hope the WG can move forward to make the adoption call of the
> better/best solution.
>
>  Gyan> The WG from recent discussions about following suit with NVO3 as
> GENEVE was picked as standards track  and the other solutions that have
> been implemented by vendors progressing as informational.
>
> As you know, the vendors and operators have made their choice already,
> over 10 vendors have implemented C-SID and it has been deploying very fast
> in the world. We need to standard it ASAP.
>
> Gyan> Good to hear the progress data point!
>
> And yes, CSID includes mainly two flavors from G-SRv6 and uSID as you
> pointed out.
>
> Gyan> Are there plans to take the two drafts mentioned in the analysis
> draft that were merged to officially create a standards track document for
> CSID  that would be progressed by the WG “only if CSID were picked”.
>
Also are there any thoughts of updating either SRV6 PGM RFC 8986 or CRH RFC
> 8754  to incorporate the SRv6 standard compression solution.
>
Kind Regards

Gyan

> Many thanks,
>
> Cheng
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *发件人:* spring [mailto:[email protected]] *代表 *Gyan Mishra
> *发送时间:* 2021年7月27日 7:51
> *收件人:* Darren Dukes (ddukes) <[email protected]>
> *抄送:* SPRING WG <[email protected]>
> *主题:* Re: [spring] SRv6 SID List compression
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear DT,
>
>
>
> Excellent work and many thanks to  the design team to come provide the
> detailed analysis of the 4 proposals and how they match up with the
> requirements.
>
>
>
> From the analysis it does sound like CSID is the choice by the DT.
>
>
>
> SRv6 compression & MSD issue is now finally solved!  Excellent news!!
>
>
>
> Now it’s just a matter of moving forward with CSID Adoption poll.
>
>
>
> From the analysis it does not seem there is any draft that is in close 2nd
> place or a close call.
>
>
>
> From the analysis draft the two drafts that are combined to create CSID ->
> I don’t see it on the Spring WG Datatracker?
>
>
>
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-analysis-02
>
>
>
> The following mechanisms are proposed to compress the SRv6 SID list:
>
>
>
>    o  CSID - [I-D.filsfilscheng-spring-srv6-srh-comp-sl-enc 
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-analysis-02#ref-I-D.filsfilscheng-spring-srv6-srh-comp-sl-enc>]
>  - Describes
>
>       two new SRv6 SID flavors, a combination of SID flavors from
>
>       [I-D.filsfils-spring-net-pgm-extension-srv6-usid 
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-analysis-02#ref-I-D.filsfils-spring-net-pgm-extension-srv6-usid>]
>  and
>
>       [I-D.cl-spring-generalized-srv6-for-cmpr 
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-analysis-02#ref-I-D.cl-spring-generalized-srv6-for-cmpr>]
>
>    o  CRH - [I-D.bonica-6man-comp-rtg-hdr 
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-analysis-02#ref-I-D.bonica-6man-comp-rtg-hdr>]
>  - Requires two new routing
>
>       header types and a label mapping technique.
>
>    o  VSID - [I-D.decraene-spring-srv6-vlsid 
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-analysis-02#ref-I-D.decraene-spring-srv6-vlsid>]
>  - Defines a set of SID
>
>       behaviors to access smaller SIDs within the SR header.
>
>    o  UIDSR - [I-D.mirsky-6man-unified-id-sr 
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-analysis-02#ref-I-D.mirsky-6man-unified-id-sr>]
>  - Extends the SRH to carry
>
>       MPLS labels or IPv6 addresses.
>
>
>
>
>
> Below 2 drafts are combined to create CSID??
>
>
>
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-filsfils-spring-net-pgm-extension-srv6-usid-10
>
>
>
>
>
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-cl-spring-generalized-srv6-for-cmpr-03
>
>
>
>
>
> Kind Regards
>
>
>
> Gyan
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 5:53 PM Darren Dukes (ddukes) <ddukes=
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> I’ll paraphrase what I said in the call...
>
>
>
> Today the design team presented analysis of proposals to compress an SRv6
> SID list.
>
> They spent a year building the requirements and completing the analysis,
> in depth, with unanimous consensus.
>
> The CSID proposal satisfied all the requirements to the largest degree of
> any proposal.
>
> That proposal has multiple implementations, and interoperability, noted in
> the draft.
>
> That proposal has a large set of SPRING participants working on it already.
>
>
>
> The problem of SRv6 SID list compression is solved, CSID is ready for
> adoption.
>
>
>
> I hope we can conclude this, and choose a single proposal for WG adoption.
>
>
>
> Darren
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> spring mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
>
> --
>
> <http://www.verizon.com/>
>
> *Gyan Mishra*
>
> *Network Solutions Architect *
>
> *Email [email protected] <[email protected]>*
>
> *M 301 502-1347*
>
>
>
-- 

<http://www.verizon.com/>

*Gyan Mishra*

*Network Solutions A**rchitect *

*Email [email protected] <[email protected]>*



*M 301 502-1347*
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring

Reply via email to