Hi Ketan, Thanks for your comments at the mic and on the list.
Yes in RFC 8986 SRv6 End.X was extended to identify L2bundle member link, we will not argue whether that is the best approach or not, but that is different from the case here. A L2 bundle member link is associated with an L3 interface, thus there is an L3 adjacency. In the cases described in this document, there is no L3 adjacency, and it is challenging to build an L3 adjacency. Best regards, Jie ________________________________________ From: Ketan Talaulikar <ketant.i...@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2024 5:47 To: Alexander Vainshtein Cc: draft-dong-spring-srv6-inter-layer-programm...@ietf.org; spring@ietf.org Subject: Re: [spring] My question at the mike about draft-dong-spring-srv6-inter-layer-programming Adding to what Sasha has said, RFC8986 that has specified End.X (refer https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8986.html#section-4.2) also allows for the same to be used for the underlying L2 bundle member links as well. To me, the L3 interface with optical sub-channels under it, seems similar and makes me also wonder (same as Sasha) about why End.X is not sufficient. Thanks, Ketan On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 2:28 PM Alexander Vainshtein <Alexander.Vainshtein=40rbbn....@dmarc.ietf.org<mailto:40rbbn....@dmarc.ietf.org>> wrote: Hi all, Just repeating the question about the draft<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-dong-spring-srv6-inter-layer-programming-08> I’ve asked at he mike at the SPRING WG session today. * Suppose that there is an underlay link between a pair of IP nodes that is not “visible in he L3 topology”. To me this means that there no P-capable (logical) interfaces associated with the endpoints of this underlay link * Suppose further that one of these nodes (the upstream one) allocates and advertises an SID with End.XU behavior for this underlay link * The upstream node receives an IPv6 packets with the tops SRv6 SID on it being the End.XU. It strips this SID (this the common behavior of all End-like SIDs) and send the resulting IPv6 packet across the link to the downstream node/\. Now the question: How should the downstream node process the received packet if its local endpoint of the undelay link s not associated with an IP-capable logical interface? If the endpoints of the underlay ink are associated with L3 interfaces in both nodes, the link becomes visible in L3 topology, and a regular End.X SID can be allocated and advertised for it. Hopefully this clarifies my question. Regards, Sasha Disclaimer This e-mail together with any attachments may contain information of Ribbon Communications Inc. and its Affiliates that is confidential and/or proprietary for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, disclosure, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and then delete all copies, including any attachments. _______________________________________________ spring mailing list -- spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org> To unsubscribe send an email to spring-le...@ietf.org<mailto:spring-le...@ietf.org> _______________________________________________ spring mailing list -- spring@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to spring-le...@ietf.org
