Session Date/Time: 09 Nov 2023 08:30

spring

Summary

The SPRING working group meeting covered several topics, including updates on existing drafts and presentations of new individual submissions. Discussions ranged from compressed segment list encoding to operational security considerations for SRv6 and various extensions for SRv6 policies. The meeting emphasized the importance of community review and feedback for further development of these documents.

Key Discussion Points

Compressed SRv6 Segment List Encoding: Progress on addressing review comments was discussed, with a focus on clarifying the document and preparing it for working group last call.
Circuit Style Segment Routing: The addition of BGP for policy creation was highlighted, and the potential for work on bitstream pseudowires in PALS to leverage these policies was mentioned. Review requests were made to the list.
SRv6 Operational Security: This individual draft's aim is to outline practical security considerations for SRv6 networks. There was considerable discussion as to whether such a document was appropriate and the value it could provide. The authors requested input and reviews from the community. Several references to existing RFCs were also made.
SRv6 Information Validation: A new draft proposes using ICMPv6 messages for data plane validation against the control plane. There was discussion on existing approaches and complexities of introducing new OAM mechanisms.
EVPN Fast Reroute: A draft adding SRv6 procedures to EVPN for convergence improvements was presented. The focus was on obtaining feedback on the SRv6 aspects of the draft, but questions regarding advertising a flag to determine final action was also discussed.
SR Reduction for SRv6 and MTP6e: A new draft proposing a new endpoint behavior for reducing SR overhead in mobile networks was presented and feedback was solicited.
Fault Mapping for IPv4 over SRv6: This document introduces new SRv6 segments for IPv4 to IPv6 translation. Community feedback was requested, and it was suggested that it be presented to the 6-ops working group.
Encapsulation of BFD for SRv6 Policy: Different encapsulation methods for BFD packets in SRv6 policies were discussed. Questions regarding BFD monitoring policies was discussed, as well as whether BFD can be unidirectional.
Validity of SR Policy Candidate Paths: An extension to SR policy architecture to control the validity adjustment of candidate paths was presented, there were no comments.
SR-MPS Fast Reroute Extension: An extension to protect failed segments, there was discussion regarding the existence of previous drafts to address the same issue.
SR Fast Reroute Information Distribution: An overview of distribution and protection of failure of specific segments. There was a request to synchronize the terminology to match the current working group language.

Decisions and Action Items

Compressed SRv6 Segment List Encoding: Editors to continue addressing remaining review comments and prepare the draft for working group last call.
Circuit Style Segment Routing: Authors to solicit further reviews on the mailing list.
SRv6 Operational Security: Authors to incorporate feedback from the community and other relevant RFCs.
SRv6 Information Validation: Author to review and compare with existing ICMPv6 mechanisms and consider feedback from network operators.
EVPN Fast Reroute: Authors to discuss alternatives, such as a flag-based approach.
Fault Mapping for IPv4 over SRv6: Authors to present the draft to the 6-ops working group.
Encapsulation of BFD for SRv6 Policy: Author to reply to Greg's comments on the mailing list and review the existing BFD terminology.
SR-MPS Fast Reroute Extension: Author to rewrite proposal and reference earlier works and a discussion on a clear benefit to a second solution is included.
SR Fast Reroute Information Distribution: Author to resubmit draft with proper and approved terminology.

Next Steps

Authors of individual drafts should incorporate feedback and seek further reviews.
Working group participants are encouraged to review and provide comments on the drafts presented, particularly on the mailing lists.
Authors of drafts addressing similar issues should collaborate to consolidate efforts.