On Sun, 10 Oct 2021, 08:25 Robert Raszuk, <rob...@raszuk.net> wrote: > Hi Brian & all, > > Last email from me on this topic as I am pretty sure this will otherwise > never end. > > I am not sure anyone will hardly argue that SRv6 is IPv6 or not. Maybe it > is IPv6+ fully backwards compatible with IPv6. > > What really matters to me is that SRv6 packets can be forwarded by not SR > aware IPv6 network elements with no change to data plane and control plane > required. That's it - no more - no less. > > And so far all SPRING work on SRv6 including the draft in the subject line > of this mail meets that. >
You've demonstrated you don't know enough IPv6 to say that. That is also something that 6man are the authority to say, not SPRING. > Kind regards, > Robert > > > On 10-Oct-21 10:04, Robert Raszuk wrote: >> > >> > Please kindly correct me if I am wrong, but where do you see that SRv6 >> is mandated to use "IPv6 Interface IDs" ? >> >> I have no idea, but IPv6 is mandated to use IPv6 Interface IDs. If that >> doesn't apply to SRV6, then it's impossible to claim that SRV6 is IPv6. >> >> This isn't just academic standards-oriented formalism. As others have >> pointed out, it has very significant deployment and operational >> implications, given that most products support IPv6, not SRV6. >> >> Brian > >
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
