Hi Fernando,
> The online possible instantiation of "Destination Address" as in RFC8200 > is the final destination of the packet. No. That is incorrect. Hint: Please read carefully RFC2473. Please focus on sections: 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 5.1 etc ... Kindly read this part of section 3.2 at least few times: a tunnel Destination Options extension header is processed *at the tunnel exit-point node.* .. . . Upon receiving an IPv6 packet destined to an IPv6 address of a tunnel exit-point node, its IPv6 protocol layer processes the tunnel headers. .... 5.1 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2473#section-5.1> Tunnel IPv6 Extension Headers Depending on IPv6 node configuration parameters, a tunnel entry-point node may append to the tunnel IPv6 main header one or more IPv6 extension headers, such as a Hop-by-Hop Options header, a Routing header, or others. .... Then you may continue with your appeal. - - - Darren and others, While this is clear for most folks I see that perhaps any SRv6 spec (NP in particular) should clearly distinguish the notion of final packet destination address from segment endpoint destination address inserted in the encapsulation header. Today document only defines "DA: Destination Address" - I can see why this may confuse some folks as it is used interchangeably with original destination address. IMO it would be a good change to redefined "DA" as "Segment Endpoint Destination Address" and when referring to original packet destination address perhaps call it Original DA (O-DA) and original source address (O-SA). That way there would be no confusion at all (one may hope ;-). Just a hint. Best, Robert
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
