Re: [spring] [IPv6] New draft: L4 Checksums in SRv6

2023-08-04 Thread Tom Herbert
On Fri, Aug 4, 2023 at 2:23 AM Tal Mizrahi wrote: > > Hi Tom, > > > This is a major problem with regards to L4 checksum computation in > > deployment. RFC8200 and even IPv4 assume that the transport layer > > checksum can be correctly calculated solely based on the contents of > > the packet with

Re: [spring] [IPv6] New draft: L4 Checksums in SRv6

2023-08-04 Thread Tal Mizrahi
Hi Tom, > This is a major problem with regards to L4 checksum computation in > deployment. RFC8200 and even IPv4 assume that the transport layer > checksum can be correctly calculated solely based on the contents of > the packet without additional context. A compressed segment list in > the DA wi

Re: [spring] [IPv6] New draft: L4 Checksums in SRv6

2023-08-03 Thread Tony Przygienda
Tom, so moving SRv6 into NAT equivalent space is an interesting take, granted (and sure better than bis'ing STD). Thinking along those lines a) SRv6 becomes L4 aware and goes chasing all the checksums in all L4s to inc adjust them and gets silicon rev'ed up on every new L4 in the future. b) someh

Re: [spring] [IPv6] New draft: L4 Checksums in SRv6

2023-08-03 Thread Tom Herbert
On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 9:30 AM Tony Przygienda wrote: > > well, turns out using a destination address to piggy back some computation > semantics and especially changing it in mid-flite is not a great idea. Who > knew ... Tony, We already have a working example on how to change destination addr

Re: [spring] [IPv6] New draft: L4 Checksums in SRv6

2023-08-03 Thread Nick Hilliard
If the proposed change is a non-backwards compatible modification right down at the bottom of the IP stack, that's a pretty big ask.  Has there been any assessment of what this is going to change or break? Nick Tony Przygienda wrote on 03/08/2023 17:29: well, turns out using a destination addr

Re: [spring] [IPv6] New draft: L4 Checksums in SRv6

2023-08-03 Thread Tony Przygienda
well, turns out using a destination address to piggy back some computation semantics and especially changing it in mid-flite is not a great idea. Who knew ... as to bis'ing STD86 I was quickly thinking "it's not April yet" ... -- tony On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 9:43 AM wrote: > Hi Tal, > > > Plea

Re: [spring] [IPv6] New draft: L4 Checksums in SRv6

2023-08-03 Thread Tom Herbert
Tal, >From the draft: "Compressed segment lists can be used in the Destination Address without the presence of a Routing header, and in this case the IPv6 Destination address can be modified along the path. This is another case in which the checksum is computed based on the Destination Address val

Re: [spring] [IPv6] New draft: L4 Checksums in SRv6

2023-08-03 Thread xiao.min2
Hi Tal, Please note that there is an existing draft: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-xiao-spring-srv6-checksum/ which attempts to address the problem you found and another one described in the penultimate paragraph of the Introduction section, in a different way not requiring to