IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [GROW] draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut status?

Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org> Mon, 20 March 2017 20:54 UTC

Return-Path: <jhaas@slice.pfrc.org>
X-Original-To: grow@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: grow@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 950B21275C5 for <grow@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Mar 2017 13:54:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.903
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.903 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WcX0cDPZSx3I for <grow@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Mar 2017 13:54:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from slice.pfrc.org (slice.pfrc.org [67.207.130.108]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 018731293D9 for <grow@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Mar 2017 13:54:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by slice.pfrc.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 46C2F1E33F; Mon, 20 Mar 2017 17:00:21 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 17:00:21 -0400
From: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>
To: bruno.decraene@orange.com
Cc: Job Snijders <job@ntt.net>, "grow@ietf.org" <grow@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20170320210021.GI28021@pfrc.org>
References: <20170315131039.gxle23rupztnexqm@Vurt.local> <1294_1489586438_58C94906_1294_16108_1_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A31C6FFA0@OPEXCLILM21.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <20170315145416.iiox6dz4u53dkfn4@Vurt.local> <12219_1489591279_58C95BEF_12219_294_1_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A31C704E8@OPEXCLILM21.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <12219_1489591279_58C95BEF_12219_294_1_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A31C704E8@OPEXCLILM21.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/grow/PKmJsfcgfNCnJ2ql1T_3STpB9DU>
Subject: Re: [GROW] draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut status?
X-BeenThere: grow@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Grow Working Group Mailing List <grow.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/grow>, <mailto:grow-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/grow/>
List-Post: <mailto:grow@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:grow-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow>, <mailto:grow-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 20:54:04 -0000

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 03:21:18PM +0000, bruno.decraene@orange.com wrote:
>  > I'm somewhat inclined to proceed with the gshut concept as a well-known
>  > transitive rfc 1997 community. What do others think?
>  
> I agree with you.
> Until now, in order to capture all the options, waiting for draft-ietf-idr-as4octet-extcomm-generic-subtype seemed reasonable (at the cost of waiting for years, but this was not expected as we though vendors would implement it to accommodate 4-octects AS deployments). It's not anymore, so I guess we'll update the draft to follow this proposed path.

I have no issues with a well known RFC 1997 community.

The generic as4-octet could be used as well.  It's just an extended
community code point.

End of the day, it's whatever gets the feature shipped.[1]

-- Jeff

[1] You've been able to do arbitrary extended communities in Junos for a
while.  They don't necessarily display right in show commands, but the
transitivity flag is respected.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email