I agree with Jorge.. In fact I find the tone of the comment to be very inappropriate:
*> In case of best effort/flex algo we must mandate user to set corresponding locator as BGP nexthop for srv6 routes.* *No we MUST not mandate anything to the user. * *We MUST provide flexibility to address all deployment cases user may have. * *Best,* *R.* On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 3:47 PM Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View) < jorge.raba...@nokia.com> wrote: > Hi Rajesh, > > > > The draft is written so that the next-hop address MAY be covered by the > locator, but there are cases in which the next-hop address is not part of > the locator prefix, and there are implementations already allowing that, so > I don’t agree the document should mandate what you are suggesting. > > > > Thanks. > > Jorge > > > > *From: *Rajesh M <mraj...@juniper.net> > *Date: *Monday, July 19, 2021 at 3:24 PM > *To: *Rajesh M <mrajesh=40juniper....@dmarc.ietf.org>, Ketan Talaulikar > (ketant) <ket...@cisco.com>, gdawra.i...@gmail.com <gdawra.i...@gmail.com>, > Clarence Filsfils (cfilsfil) <cfils...@cisco.com>, rob...@raszuk.net < > rob...@raszuk.net>, bruno.decra...@orange.com <bruno.decra...@orange.com>, > Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View) <jorge.raba...@nokia.com> > *Cc: *spr...@ietf.org <spr...@ietf.org>, b...@ans.net <b...@ans.net>, > Shraddha Hegde <shrad...@juniper.net>, bess@ietf.org <bess@ietf.org>, > Srihari Sangli <ssan...@juniper.net> > *Subject: *RE: SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services > (draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-07) > > Hi Authors, > > > > Please respond. > > > > Thanks > > Rajesh > > > > > > Juniper Business Use Only > > *From:* spring <spring-boun...@ietf.org> *On Behalf Of *Rajesh M > *Sent:* Thursday, July 15, 2021 4:36 PM > *To:* Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) <ket...@cisco.com>; gdawra.i...@gmail.com; > Clarence Filsfils (cfilsfil) <cfils...@cisco.com>; rob...@raszuk.net; > bruno.decra...@orange.com; jorge.raba...@nokia.com > *Cc:* spr...@ietf.org; b...@ans.net; Shraddha Hegde <shrad...@juniper.net>; > bess@ietf.org > *Subject:* [spring] SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services > (draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-07) > > > > *[External Email. Be cautious of content]* > > > > Hi All, > > > > As per this draft, this is how resolution must work. > > > > 1)For Non Intent service Route: > > if BGP next hop is not reachable return. > > Resolve SRv6 Service SID for forwarding. > > > > 2)For Intent service Route (IGP Flex-Algo first then BGP CAR then SR > Policy): > > BGP next hop is not reachable return. > > Resolve SRv6 Service SID for forwarding(To find IGP flex algo).if > successfully resolves then return. > > Resolve BGP next hop for forwarding (in case above is not success). > > > > > > *Using Service SID (overlay),for resolution is definitely not recommended.* > > > > *Instead in case of srv6, we always resolve on BGP nexthop. This will be > in line with BGP legacy.* > > *In case of best effort/flex algo we must mandate user to set > corresponding locator as BGP nexthop for srv6 routes.* > > *I think this is a reasonable mandate.* > > > > Thanks > > Rajesh > > > > Juniper Business Use Only >
_______________________________________________ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
