|
Linda,
I think that you are assuming the PE's are always routers. They can be hosts that support VPN.
In fact, this is the most likely use-case. These days, most routers support MPLS. So, MPLS VPNs suffice. There is no need for an alternative forwarding plane.
The only case where you need an alternative forwarding plane is when the PE is a server that doesn't support MPLS.
Also, the Destination Options Header is least likely to be dropped by an intervening network. If we were to follow the reasoning that you present below, we would have to deprecate all extension headers.
Ron
Juniper Business Use Only From: Linda Dunbar via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, February 4, 2025 12:14 PM To: gen-art@xxxxxxxx <gen-art@xxxxxxxx> Cc: draft-ietf-6man-vpn-dest-opt.all@xxxxxxxx <draft-ietf-6man-vpn-dest-opt.all@xxxxxxxx>; ipv6@xxxxxxxx <ipv6@xxxxxxxx>; last-call@xxxxxxxx <last-call@xxxxxxxx> Subject: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-6man-vpn-dest-opt-01 [External Email. Be cautious of content]
Reviewer: Linda Dunbar Review result: Not Ready I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just like any other last call comments. For more information, please see the FAQ at <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/gen/GenArtFAQ__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BLykpJutCCzxKiIZjeHVdoB338VQZhpLkmdB5B4S_VdshlvRcmCmLJElE3_jegOw0G6IKgyNWQDToPU$ >. Document: draft-ietf-6man-vpn-dest-opt-01 Reviewer: Linda Dunbar Review Date: 2025-02-04 IETF LC End Date: 2025-02-04 IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat Summary: the document proposes an experiment to encode VPN service information within an IPv6 Destination Option to facilitate VPN deployments Major issues: - IPv6 Destination Options are typically meant for end-host processing, not for PE routers. Many IPv6 deployments drop packets with extension headers, particularly in transit networks. The draft assumes that ingress and egress PE routers will process the VPN Service Option, but if intermediate routers drop these packets, the approach may fail in real-world deployments. - There is a security risk of VPN boundaries being breached if an attacker injects a packet with a forged VPN Service Option. - The document does not clearly explain why this approach is preferable to SRv6 or MPLS-over-IPv6 Minor issues: Nits/editorial comments: Best Regards, Linda Dunbar |
-- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
