Hi Michael,
Thanks! > On Sep 2, 2022, at 20:34, Michael Richardson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Sebastian Moeller <[email protected]> wrote: >>> sadly, they aren't doing IP processing. I don't think that they ever >>> will decide to for NIH reasons. I suspect that their SDN hardware >>> probably can, and I think that SR6 is probably ideal for their use, >>> but... > >> Why would SR6 be better than any other "underlay" encapsulation here, >> like MPLS or SR-MPLS? Naively put this seems to trade 4 byte per label >> with a full 40 byte IPv6 header plus 8 bytes plus 16 bytes per > > SR6 collapses all those things into a single IPv6 forwarding engine. > The idea is that it's converged. As for the 44 byte header, as envisioned > by the SR6 people, they would use the original header, but that's against the > Ipv6 architecture. There are ways to compress that header down if you need > to do that. > >> "label". Asking out of genuine curiosity what are those additional >> bytes in overhead actually buying (except the freedom from MPLS). > > IPv6 all the way down. Thanks. Still puzzled but now in an informed way ;) Regards Sebastian _______________________________________________ Starlink mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
