Re: [net-next,v2,4/5] seg6: add support for the SRv6 End.DT4 behavior

[Andrea Mayer]

Hi Jakub,
Please see my responses inline:

On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:54:37 -0800
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 00:00:24 +0100 Andrea Mayer wrote:
> > On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 13:40:10 -0800
> > Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > I can tackle the v6 version but how do we face the compatibility issue raised
> > by Stefano in his message?
> > 
> > if it is ok to implement a uAPI that breaks the existing scripts, it is relatively
> > easy to replicate the VRF-based approach also in v6.
> 
> We need to keep existing End.DT6 as is, and add a separate
> implementation.

ok

>
> The way to distinguish between the two could be either by

> 1) passing via
> netlink a flag attribute (which would request use of VRF in both
> cases);

yes, feasible... see UAPI solution 1

> 2) using a different attribute than SEG6_LOCAL_TABLE for the
> table id (or perhaps passing VRF's ifindex instead), e.g.
> SEG6_LOCAL_TABLE_VRF;

yes, feasible... see UAPI solution 2

> 3) or adding a new command
> (SEG6_LOCAL_ACTION_END_DT6_VRF) which would behave like End.DT4.

no, we prefer not to add a new command, because it is better to keep a 
semantic one-to-one relationship between these commands and the SRv6 
behaviors defined in the draft.


UAPI solution 1

we add a new parameter "vrfmode". DT4 can only be used with the 
vrfmode parameter (hence it is a required parameter for DT4).
DT6 can be used with "vrfmode" (new vrf based mode) or without "vrfmode" 
(legacy mode)(hence "vrfmode" is an optional parameter for DT6)

UAPI solution 1 examples:

ip -6 route add 2001:db8::1/128 encap seg6local action End.DT4 vrfmode table 100 dev eth0
ip -6 route add 2001:db8::1/128 encap seg6local action End.DT6 vrfmode table 100 dev eth0
ip -6 route add 2001:db8::1/128 encap seg6local action End.DT6 table 100 dev eth0

UAPI solution 2

we turn "table" into an optional parameter and we add the "vrftable" optional
parameter. DT4 can only be used with the "vrftable" (hence it is a required
parameter for DT4).
DT6 can be used with "vrftable" (new vrf mode) or with "table" (legacy mode)
(hence it is an optional parameter for DT6).

UAPI solution 2 examples:

ip -6 route add 2001:db8::1/128 encap seg6local action End.DT4 vrftable 100 dev eth0
ip -6 route add 2001:db8::1/128 encap seg6local action End.DT6 vrftable 100 dev eth0
ip -6 route add 2001:db8::1/128 encap seg6local action End.DT6 table 100 dev eth0

IMO solution 2 is nicer from UAPI POV because we always have only one 
parameter, maybe solution 1 is slightly easier to implement, all in all 
we prefer solution 2 but we can go for 1 if you prefer.

Waiting for your advice!

Thanks,
Andrea