Hi Lucy,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Int-area [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Lucy yong
> Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2015 7:31 AM
> To: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Int-area] Why combine IP-in-UDP with GUE?
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Int-area [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Stewart Bryant
> Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2015 2:32 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Int-area] Why combine IP-in-UDP with GUE?
> 
> I confess that I have only skimmed this thread, but as far as I can see no 
> one has mentioned OAM. If we are designing a general
> purpose encapsulation there really needs to be an OAM indicator so that OAM 
> can fate share with the data that it is monitoring.
> [Lucy] GUE header has OAM indicator.
> 
> I don't think it is a factor in this discussion unless people think that we 
> will be doing super DPI, but
> RFC4928 notes an issue when using the first nibble of a packet as a type 
> identifier in an IP/MPLS environment. In a nutshell this says
> avoid 0 and 1 as well as 4 and 6.
> [Lucy] Thank you to point out this. This is why GUE header SHOULD NOT adopt 
> this first nibble approach.

I think your comment is out of context. It is saying avoid 0, 1, 4 and 6 so as
to not confuse it with IP. It does not say to avoid other numbers (e.g., 7)
that could be used to identify GUE.

Getting back to our earlier discussion, IP-in-UDP and GUE are currently
two half-solutions. Put them together and you get a whole solution.
Keep them apart, and someone else is going to have to write a whole
solution sometime down the line from now. 

Thanks - Fred
[email protected]

> However, if GUE payload is
> IP, it is OK to inspect the first nibble of the payload to determine IPv4 or 
> IPv6 because this aligns with IP protocol.
> 
> Thanks,
> Lucy
> 
> - Stewart
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area

_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area

Reply via email to