Hi Ron,

Thanks for that clarification.

I note that you are not anymore saying "Are not interested in SR" like you had 
mentioned before the WG adoption call : 
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/LheyFD_uwuHp7tiG8Y1CwKngDYI/

So, would it be fair to say that the operator that you are referring to below, 
wishes to deploy a Traffic Engineering solution using a subset of Segment 
Routing (i.e. a reduced portion of Spring Architecture) that only supports 
prefix and adjacency SIDs as indicated by the two "forwarding methods" that are 
referred to in draft-bonica-6man-comp-rtg-hdr?

Thanks,
Ketan

-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Bonica <rbonica=40juniper....@dmarc.ietf.org> 
Sent: 25 May 2020 09:03
To: Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) <ket...@cisco.com>; Joel M. Halpern 
<j...@joelhalpern.com>
Cc: rtg-...@ietf.org; spring@ietf.org; 6man <6...@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: [spring] CRH is back to the SPRING Use-Case - Re: Size of CR in CRH

Ketan,

Please consider an operator who:

- Wants a way to steer IPv6 packets through a specified path that includes many 
nodes (>8)
- Does not want any of the following:
        - A new VPN encapsulation technique
        - A new service function chaining technique
        - Network programming
        - MPLS and uSID
        - To encoding instructions in IPv6 addresses.

These operators want a compact routing header, nothing more.

                                                                           Ron


Juniper Business Use Only

-----Original Message-----
From: ipv6 <ipv6-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2020 1:42 AM
To: Joel M. Halpern <j...@joelhalpern.com>
Cc: rtg-...@ietf.org; spring@ietf.org; 6man <6...@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: [spring] CRH is back to the SPRING Use-Case - Re: Size of CR in CRH

[SNIP]

I am looking for explanation of the "other ways" that CRH can be used (i.e. 
those outside the Spring architecture). I am trying to understand from the 
authors what would be the applicability of that solution, it's use-cases and 
it's requirements. That is what, I believe, will help us evaluate the CRH 
proposal in the context of this working call. That will help us answer these 
questions like the scope of the SID, 32-bit or 16-bit or something else and 
what the CRH-FIB is going to turn out like.


[SNIP]
------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring

Reply via email to