Section 6.1 On 2021-09-24, 10:53 AM, "Gyan Mishra" <[email protected]> wrote:
Thank you Darren! Few comments. I do see many early allocation for C-SID for various endpoint behaviors. https://www.iana.org/assignments/segment-routing/segment-routing.xhtml I was trying to find out where in the CSID draft that is stated. Please provide the section. “CSID draft recommended NEXT-C-SID use for 16-bit C-SIDs, and REPLACE-C-SID use for 32-bit C-SIDs. “ Just based on the CSID draft SRv6 forwarding plane flavors, SID formatting, the NEXT-C-SID used a 16-bit combined NF -Locator/Function uSID variant where the REPLACE-C-SID uses a 32-bit combined NF-Locator/Function. I did not see explicit verbiage as to one flavor or the other for 16 or 32 bit SID. I believe this information is important to be included in the analysis draft as well. Section 6 talks about CSID length, Block length and GIB/LIB usage but does not specify explicitly what you are stating. As the WG has clearly stated that they would like a single solution, however CSID is inclusive of 2 SRv6 forwarding compression solutions not one from the two drafts - uSID & G-SID. So that would have to be hashed out by the WG taking into account the interoperability issue that is the key point of contention to having multiple solutions from an operators perspective. Kind Regards Gyan On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 10:10 AM Darren Dukes (ddukes) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi Gyan, as a DT member, I can answer your analysis draft question. Consistent with the requirement document, proposals were analyzed with 16-bit and 32-bit SID lengths, though several supported additional options. The CSID draft recommended NEXT-C-SID use for 16-bit C-SIDs, and REPLACE-C-SID use for 32-bit C-SIDs. The design team followed this recommendation in its analysis, though the CSID draft notes all flavors support both 16-bit and 32-bit C-SID length. Darren On 2021-09-19, 3:34 PM, "spring" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Dear Authors After having a few discussions on threads related to the SRv6 compression analysis draft results, as well as WG coming to consensus on a single SRv6 compression solution, a few critical questions have come up related to C-SID draft that requires clarification by the authors. The C-SID draft has 3 compression solutions below and is a combination of the two drafts below which introduces 2 of the 3 compression solutions with the C-SID draft introduction of yet a 3rd compression solution. Which of the 3 C-SID draft compression solutions was included as part of the DT analysis draft results and conclusion? This is a critical question that needs to be answered for clarification on the C-SID draft solution. As the WG has consensus on a single solution we need to have clarification from the authors which of the 3 compression solutions was included in the analysis. The three solutions are very different and all would yield different analysis results. I understand the authors have called the each solution a endpoint flavor which I see from the IANA codepoint allocations, however each flavor is a different solution. https://www.iana.org/assignments/segment-routing/segment-routing.xhtml So the WG as stated would like a single solution so now we need feedback from the authors which of the three solutions or endpoint flavors was part of the DT analysis draft that the authors would like to put forward as the single compression solution. C-SID is a combination of the two drafts below: Combination of the two drafts below: G-SID - Generalized SID “REPLACE-C-SID” https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-cl-spring-generalized-srv6-for-cmpr-03 SRv6 uSID micro-segment “ NEXT-C-SID” https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-filsfils-spring-net-pgm-extension-srv6-usid-10 Kind Regards Gyan -- [http://ss7.vzw.com/is/image/VerizonWireless/vz-logo-email]<http://www.verizon.com/> Gyan Mishra Network Solutions Architect Email [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> M 301 502-1347 -- [http://ss7.vzw.com/is/image/VerizonWireless/vz-logo-email]<http://www.verizon.com/> Gyan Mishra Network Solutions Architect Email [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> M 301 502-1347
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
