<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<font face="Tahoma">More specifically, what I meant was at a data
plane level, you get rid of SR-MPLS and migrate to SRv6.<br>
<br>
Mark.<br>
</font><br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/Dec/18 09:24, Andrew Alston
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:FD435AB0-1A30-4D46-829E-1CC6DF50F0C3@liquidtelecom.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0cm;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0cm;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style>
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Heh again –
SR without SRv6 – gets rid of LDP anyway – and RSVP-TE is
also covered – because SRTE still works with normal SID’s.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">The ONLY
difference between SR and SRv6 is that instead of using the
standard label stack as a kinda “packet wrapper” you are
embedding the stuff inside extension headers – the rest of
the stuff – applies entirely equally to both.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">That’s what
I don’t understand.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">On standard
SR – I can use RSVP pop and go – I can traffic engineer – I
have NO need of LDP (other than if I’m using Martini, and
that’s the same with SRv6 – because Martini has explicit LDP
binding) – etc etc<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">The problem
with SRv6 is that you are implementing variable length
headers onto the ASIC’s – which is infinitely more complex –
and that creates some very interesting challenges.
Effectively with SR – dependent on the implementation – you
can eliminate the need for entropy labels by doing L4
hashing beneath the labels – I cannot see how you are going
to do that if your packet header processing becomes as
complex as it would in the case of SRv6.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Andrew<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:black">From: </span></b><span
style="color:black">Mark Tinka
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:mark.tinka@seacom.mu"><mark.tinka@seacom.mu></a><br>
<b>Date: </b>Tuesday, 11 December 2018 at 23:20<br>
<b>To: </b>Andrew Alston
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com"><Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com></a>, <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:afnog@afnog.org">"afnog@afnog.org"</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:afnog@afnog.org"><afnog@afnog.org></a><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [afnog] SRv6<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">On 12/Dec/18
09:01, Andrew Alston wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Mark,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Thing is –
you don’t need SRv6 to get rid of v4 – you can use v6 with
SR using standard label stack – the only difference with
SRv6 and SR is that your hops are embedded inside the v6
extension headers rather than using standard label stack
for the same thing. SR without SRv6 is entirely address
family agnostic, hence the question</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><br>
So SRv6 appears to be a complete alternative to (SR)MPLS.<br>
<br>
If you want to get rid of MPLS - and its associated control
planes such as RSVP-TE, LDP, e.t.c - then you can encode the
label stack in the IPv6 EH's since and totally take MPLS out
of your network.<br>
<br>
That appears to be the use-case.<br>
<br>
Mark.<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>