Hi Ron, Agreed ICMP is an upper-layer header that should be consistent with the SRv6-OAM draft [1], and I guess you may have also noticed the same. Please see the proposed text I have just posted.
Regards, Jingrong [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6man-spring-srv6-oam-05 From: Ron Bonica [mailto:rbon...@juniper.net] Sent: Monday, June 15, 2020 9:54 PM To: Xiejingrong (Jingrong) <xiejingr...@huawei.com>; Aijun Wang <wang...@chinatelecom.cn>; i...@ietf.org; spring@ietf.org Subject: RE: About the upper layer header processing in RFC8754(SRH) Aijun, Jingrong, Could the upper-layer header also be ICMP, as in a ICMP Echo message? Ron Juniper Business Use Only From: ipv6 <ipv6-boun...@ietf.org<mailto:ipv6-boun...@ietf.org>> On Behalf Of Xiejingrong (Jingrong) Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2020 10:29 PM To: Aijun Wang <wang...@chinatelecom.cn<mailto:wang...@chinatelecom.cn>>; i...@ietf.org<mailto:i...@ietf.org>; spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org> Subject: RE: About the upper layer header processing in RFC8754(SRH) [External Email. Be cautious of content] Hi Aijun, Very good catch! I think the 4.3.1.2 need to be updated ! I would like to propose some text (maybe later today) for RFC8754 4.3.1.2, as well as some other text in SRv6-PGM section 4.1 (and some related sections) I have observed about the Upper-layer processing for further discussion. Thanks Jingrong From: ipv6 [mailto:ipv6-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Aijun Wang Sent: Monday, June 15, 2020 10:14 AM To: i...@ietf.org<mailto:i...@ietf.org>; spring@ietf.org<mailto:spr...@ietf..org> Subject: About the upper layer header processing in RFC8754(SRH) Hi, Folks: RFC8754(SRH) section 4.3.1.2(https://tools..ietf.org/html/rfc8754#section-4..3.1.2<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8754*section-4.3.1.2__;Iw!!NEt6yMaO-gk!TQj3lWlbJi1xnhmD0skSC1Qbp_vkkYT77iE2zA_6hLItZqr8eZxbW1IoKhFgaBkD$>) describes the process of upper layer header as the followings: IF (Upper-layer Header is IPv4 or IPv6) and local configuration permits { Perform IPv6 decapsulation Resubmit the decapsulated packet to the IPv4 or IPv6 module } ELSE { ...... } And in network programming draft section 9.1(https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-15#section-9.1<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-15*section-9.1__;Iw!!NEt6yMaO-gk!TQj3lWlbJi1xnhmD0skSC1Qbp_vkkYT77iE2zA_6hLItZqr8eZxbW1IoKiVOq5HR$>), one new Ethernet Next Header Type(143) is proposed. Although the detail process of this new next header are described in the network program draft, does it need to update the section 4.3.1.2 of RFC8754 to reflect the process of new header type(143)? Best Regards Aijun Wang China Telecom
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
