I think this is a relevant use-case / feature. Few comments after first read: - For SRv6 the procedure may be slightly different, ie steer traffic via MicroTAP capable node or have MicroTAP as integrated capability of "default" forwarding (of capable nodes) and indicate the parameter - this is the approach in the current draft if I understand correctly. - Section 2.3 describes that if a MicroTAP SID becomes the active on the a node not supporting the MicroTAP capability, the packet would be dropped. I wondered if this is correct? Wouldnt the packet be forwarded to the "monitor" node? This breaks the communication effectively, but not a drop at the node not supported MicroTAP. - In general, or least for intercept, one would be interested in both directions of a traffic stream (e.g to / from a specific IP). To address this, the MicroTAP SID would need to inserted on all relevant ingresses. And the monitor may receive packets from different MicroTAP capable nodes. This may have implications for the use of IOM header (e.g. to avoid duplicate sequence ids)
cheers, Eduard On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 4:52 AM Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > Seems like a very useful feature indeed. > > Cheers, > Jeff > > On Feb 27, 2024, at 07:15, Ryan Hoffman <ryan.hoffman= > 40telus....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > > > TELUS intends to deploy this microTap segment feature once available in > vendor NOS after thorough testing in our lab. We'd expedite TELUS testing > and deployment when available from vendors, as this is a much needed > feature in our network. > > Thanks, > Ryan Hoffman > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 3:28 PM Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <zzh...@juniper.net> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> The authors of this draft would like to get your feedback on this draft. >> >> This document specifies a microTap segment that can be used to >> instruct a transit node to make a copy of a segment-routed packet and >> deliver it to a specified node for the purpose of network monitoring, >> trouble shooting, or lawful intercept. >> >> Due to the limit of Spring WG session time we have not been able to >> present it but we submitted slides before: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/115/materials/slides-115-spring-slides-115-spring-microtap-segment-00 >> . >> >> Thanks. >> Jeffrey >> >> Juniper Business Use Only >> > _______________________________________________ > 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 >
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
