SFC NSH is not a DOH. SFC is a next-header. And the preferred way to
carry the VPN information for SFC is to use an SFC metadatum, since that
is already supported. The VPN destination option is for the non-SFC case.
Yours,
Joel
On 5/22/2020 11:11 AM, Pengshuping (Peng Shuping) wrote:
Hi Ron,
If using DOH, then we would have DOH (VPN) + DOH (SFC) + RH per packet
in some circumstances, right? What if more (ever-emerging) services are
required? Not sure about the forwarding efficiency.
Best regards,
Shuping
*From:*ipv6 [mailto:ipv6-boun...@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Ron Bonica
*Sent:* Friday, May 22, 2020 10:17 PM
*To:* Chengli (Cheng Li) <c...@huawei.com>; 6man <6...@ietf.org>;
spring@ietf.org
*Cc:* spring@ietf.org
*Subject:* RE: How CRH support SFC/Segment Endpoint option?
Cheng,
The sole purpose of a Routing header is to steer a packet along a
specified path to its destination. It shouldn’t attempt to do any more
than that.
The CRH does not attempt to deliver service function information to
service function instances. However, it is compatible with:
-The Network Service Header (NSH)
-The Destination Options header that precedes the Routing header
Both of these can be used to deliver service function information to
service function instances.
Ron
Juniper Business Use Only
*From:*Chengli (Cheng Li) <c...@huawei.com <mailto:c...@huawei.com>>
*Sent:* Friday, May 22, 2020 2:56 AM
*To:* 6man <6...@ietf.org <mailto:6...@ietf.org>>; spring@ietf.org
<mailto:spring@ietf.org>; Ron Bonica <rbon...@juniper.net
<mailto:rbon...@juniper.net>>
*Cc:* spring@ietf.org <mailto:spring@ietf.org>
*Subject:* How CRH support SFC/Segment Endpoint option?
*[External Email. Be cautious of content]*
Hi Ron,
When reading the CRH draft, I have a question about how CRH support SFC?
For example, we have a SID List [S1, S2, S3, S4, S5], and S3 is a SFC
related SID, how to indicate that? By PSSI? [1]
But how to know which segment endpoint node/egress node should process
this PSSI? At the beginning of the SRm6 design, this is described in
[2]. But you deleted the containers [2].
Without that, I don’t really understand how SFC can be supported.
Best,
Cheng
[1].
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bonica-spring-sr-mapped-six-01#section-4.1
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bonica-spring-sr-mapped-six-01*section-4.1__;Iw!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UD4vf0darQ9cskFhH1fJ9jwZJ-nIciQxgVnf1219YuyyaNcgvNdRUdkjwP15i-Xa$>
[2].
https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-bonica-6man-seg-end-opt-04.txt
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-bonica-6man-seg-end-opt-04.txt__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UD4vf0darQ9cskFhH1fJ9jwZJ-nIciQxgVnf1219YuyyaNcgvNdRUdkjwNmXwyHT$>.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
i...@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
