Re: [Bgp-autoconf] Review of draft-dt-idr-bgp-autoconf-considerations

[Linda Dunbar <[e-mail]>]

Jeff and Warren,

I have read through the draft. It is very well written.

Just some minor comments:


  *   Page 2 Section 2.3 third bullet has "Authentication Method". But  I don't see any of the described methods has auto discovering "authentication method". Is it really a requirement of BGP Auto-Discovery protocol?


  *   Page 2 Section 2.3 Fourth bullet: The following BGP peer session parameters  are also present in a BGP OPEN message. If a node can trust the parameters discovered by BGP Auto-discovery, why not trust the same information from BGP Open?


   *  Discovery of BGP peer session parameters relevant to peer
      selection such as Autonomous System (AS) Numbers, BGP Identifiers,
      supported address families/subsequent-address families (AFI/
      SAFIs), and device roles.



  *   Section 6 IANA consideration: For Layer 3 discovery, do you need IANA to register a specific MULTICAST address for BGP auto discovery?
  *   Section 3.5: you have the following description:
      ".  Negotiated keying solutions, such as
      IKE, may be desireable but not mandatory for the solution."

Under what circumstance, the IKE is desired?  Is it for the scenario that  peer is  NOT trusted for Auto-config? With  IKE, a node can authenticate any internet reachable peers, which one to choose?


  *   Page 5: first sentence doesn't quite belong there:
"The length of message supported by the protocol."

Thank you,
Linda Dunbar
From: Bgp-autoconf <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Majumdar, Kausik
Sent: Monday, March 1, 2021 1:04 PM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [Bgp-autoconf] Review of draft-dt-idr-bgp-autoconf-considerations


Hi Jeff, Warren,

I have gone through the draft, it is a well-written document. I agree with Acee that the doc is ready to be reviewed by the IDR WG. I have also noticed that Acee suggested some editorial changes, with that it looks good. I don't have anything more from the editorial side other than few minor points that I captured below, that might be good to discuss in tomorrow's meeting.

Comments are in >> -

In Section 2.3.2 BGP Auto-Discovery Device Role Requirements
>>Should we define the Code Points for the standard Device Roles and their corresponding functions?

In Section 2.4 Operator Configuration
>>Are we planning to use the BGP Autoconf mechanism for the session validation purposes? If so, how Autoconf would be used to collect the information to validate the sessions. I think we need to describe a little more here.

In Section 5.5    Discovery at Layer Seven
"Rendezvous approaches may appeal to deployments which favor a central control framework.
On the other hand, those who favor distributed protocols will have the classic worries about fragility, redundancy, reliability, etc."

>>Reading through this section it is not clear what specific Layer Seven approach we are recommending here.

I think Security Considerations is well structured in the document and covered well.

Thanks,
Kausik