Re: [Bgp-autoconf] Issues not mentioned in yesterday's revision

[Linda Dunbar <[e-mail]>]

I can't get in either.

Linda

From: Majumdar, Kausik <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2021 9:06 AM
To: Jeffrey Haas <[e-mail]>; Sue Hares <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]; Linda Dunbar <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [Bgp-autoconf] Issues not mentioned in yesterday's revision

Is the meeting started? I can't get in - https://ietf.webex.com/meet/idr<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fietf.webex.com%2Fmeet%2Fidr&data=04%7C01%7Clinda.dunbar%40futurewei.com%7C63ae8476526c421de45208d8c20bde19%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637472703522182405%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=orE0Vvqmx5xdR9CXcrebEz7Poicy0zillFiWheomWjo%3D&reserved=0>

Thanks,
Kausik

From: Jeffrey Haas <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2021 5:54 AM
To: Sue Hares <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Cc: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; Linda Dunbar <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; Majumdar, Kausik <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Subject: Re: [Bgp-autoconf] Issues not mentioned in yesterday's revision




On Jan 26, 2021, at 8:52 AM, Susan Hares <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:

Jeff and Warren:

Thank you for the first draft.

This isn't even a full first draft.  It's the work in progress as currently completed for discussion today.

We can certainly cover many of the items you list below today if that's your agenda.

-- Jeff



Here's a list of requirements that I do not see mentioned:

1.  security requirements -

Is it a requirement to secure data sent in a L3 multicast BGP auto-configuration packet?
Is there a requirement that people could send a secure portion of the packet if they desired?

It all gets down to trust vs. complexity

2.  validation of Data sent

Will the bgp-autoconf  check syntax of data sent?
Will it validate the content of the data set?

3.  Will it carry link level information?
If so, what security issues will that cause.
If you trust everyone, what about errors in the fabric.

4.  Will it have a link to BFD?

5.  What requirements are there on top of the IP Multicast -
 Is the IP multicast a "spray and pray" multicast without   or is it "blast and echo check"?

Mechanisms that I personally hoped would work:
a) layer 3 multicast with "blast and echo" with ability to go through 2+ switches on way to remote end
b) optional securing of the data sent on BGP auto-configuration
c) Fast failure - via BFD or some "x" mechanism
d) optional bootstrap from IGPs or LLDP

Mechanism that I personally hoped a BGP-5 might revise its FSM.

Sue

--
Bgp-autoconf mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bgp-autoconf<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsecure-web.cisco.com%2F1ZfPf_XalNHICBOCfRS_ndff5_P2V-MdhIi3BZ7M23ETXS6DcmDRClMDvtD2JQPfyV7s5X4-Xig-NlUN94QLE2nxgS-c4KaQMm8LxM95wbntKnxQ4LnKsnuu0FgopXx3kZTp2CAEXViNLnSeDqLl79hnkIRHzUIklrgr4EQGwfN_AmWmWuvwDLFtrrNL_UGsMCT-h1i2zUQSAzuCTVn0NlX6DYoksfxLltE2NNlkzN939qaxzwMsdGtPuZj-91atFKkch8U55zUl2fk2HfZN8dNXGTyDGTnDISxRY8qcdG-rDDLgMmqZMMudRJKnvFang%2Fhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.ietf.org%252Fmailman%252Flistinfo%252Fbgp-autoconf&data=04%7C01%7Clinda.dunbar%40futurewei.com%7C63ae8476526c421de45208d8c20bde19%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637472703522182405%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=vXOe229gf%2Fdc0bLOQ8iHtVNK%2Fb7yzvtFh3AqFvwQbnk%3D&reserved=0>