Re: [GROW] I-D Action:draft-ietf-grow-va-auto-03.txt

[<[e-mail]>]

Paul, all,

>   The can-suppress tag itself is an Extended Communities Attribute
>   [RFC4360] to be assigned by IANA

It seems like you only need a single community value for tagging a route as "can-suppress". But in the draft, it seems like your are requesting the IANA to allocate a whole extended community type which is equivalent to 2^48 or 2^56 values depending on the type being extended or regular. 

If you indeed need a single value, one option would be to take one from the pool of Assigned extended communities which is defined in draft-ietf-idr-reserved-extended-communities-00.


> 3.  IANA Considerations
>   IANA must assign type values for the Extended Communities Attributes
>   that convey the tags.

IMO it would help readers if you could state the name of the IANA registry. Cf § 5.1 of RFC 5226 (Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs).
For example, assuming that you take a value from draft-ietf-idr-reserved-extended-communities draft could states:

3.  IANA Considerations

IANA is requested to assign, from the registry "BGP Reserved non-transitive extended communities", a value TBD for
   "VA can suppress":

 Registry Name: BGP Reserved non-transitive extended communities

    Name                                               Type Value
    ----                                               ----------
    VA can suppress                                    TBD



Best regards,
Bruno


> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of George, Wes E [NTK]
> Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2011 3:29 PM
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [GROW] I-D Action:draft-ietf-grow-va-auto-03.txt
> 
> Reviewed this draft as well...
> 
> See also previous comments about Normative language
> 
> Regarding the draft itself, the only specific comment I might offer is that you should probably
> specify in the beginning of section 2 when you first mention tagging routes with a community that this
> community is NON-TRANSITIVE. When I read this, I started thinking about many security concerns if this
> was not required to be a non-transitive community, only to find that it was covered on the following
> page.
> 
> Wes George
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of [e-mail]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 8:00 AM
> To: [e-mail]
> Cc: [e-mail]
> Subject: [GROW] I-D Action:draft-ietf-grow-va-auto-03.txt
> 
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
> This draft is a work item of the Global Routing Operations Working Group of the IETF.
> 
> 
> 	Title           : Auto-Configuration in Virtual Aggregation
> 	Author(s)       : P. Francis, et al.
> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-grow-va-auto-03.txt
> 	Pages           : 6
> 	Date            : 2011-02-22
> 
> Virtual Aggregation as specified in [I-D.ietf-grow-va] requires configuration of a static "VP-List" on
> all routers.  The VP-List allows routers to know which prefixes may or may not be FIB- installed.
> This draft specified an optional method of determining this that requires far less configuration.
> Specifically, it requires the configuration of a "VP-Range" in ASBRs connected to transit and peer
> ISPs.  An Extended Communities Attribute is used to convey to other routers that a given route can be
> FIB-suppressed.  This draft has no changes from the 02 draft.
> 
> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-grow-va-auto-03.txt
> 
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
> 
> Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically
> retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft.