Speaking personally, my understanding of the "stateless" aspect of SR
does not match what this email seems to describe.
SR is path stateless. There is no state related to specific paths
across the network. Any SID may be used, if it has relevant meaning, in
any path.
Advertising routers have internal state about what they mean when the
advertise SIDs.
Transit rotuers have state about where to forward packets based on the
current SID in the packet.
Binding SIDs have stored state about what stack of labels replace the
binding SID at the advertising router.
All these forms of state are considered by the community, as far as I
can tell, as acceptable and reasonable forms of state with SR.
Personally, it seems to me that replication SIDs have much the same
kinds of state, and therefore fit well in the SR architecture.
Yours,
Joel
On 12/9/2022 11:53 AM, Huaimo Chen wrote:
Hi Everyone,
It seems that the core value of segment routing is stateless (in
the core of a network). The document defines a new type of segment for
Segment Routing [RFC8402], called Replication segment. Using
Replication segment is not stateless. This is not consistent with the
core value of segment routing. I oppose the progress of the document.
Best Regards,
Huaimo
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* spring <spring-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of James Guichard
<james.n.guich...@futurewei.com>
*Sent:* Monday, November 28, 2022 10:10 AM
*To:* SPRING WG <spring@ietf.org>
*Cc:* spring-cha...@ietf.org <spring-cha...@ietf.org>
*Subject:* [spring] WGLC for draft-ietf-spring-sr-replication-segment
Dear WG:
This email starts a 2-week Working Group Last Call for
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-spring-sr-replication-segment/
<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-ietf-spring-sr-replication-segment%2F&data=05%7C01%7Chuaimo.chen%40futurewei.com%7C385b4881095c41b2c27008dad152b258%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C1%7C638052450396258660%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Xc85avPl8dZMqGuCSXAA6f89OTvRfQfQ6MGa9NCQnBE%3D&reserved=0>
Please read the updated document if you haven’t already and send your
comments to the SPRING WG list no later than December 12^th 2022.
If you are raising a point which you expect will be specifically
debated on the mailing list, consider using a specific email/thread
for this point.
Lastly, if you are an author or contributor please respond to indicate
whether you know of any undisclosed IPR related to this document.
Thanks!
Jim, Joel & Bruno
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
