Re: [Idr] [Responses for the comments during the IETF108] New Version Notification for draft-wang-idr-rd-orf-01.txt

[Aijun Wang <[e-mail]>]

Hi, Keyur, Praveen and Robert:

 

Thanks for your comments on this draft during the IETF 108 meeting.  

Below are responses for your questions, please review them to see whether they resolve your concerns:

 

【Q-Praveen】: When PE1 injects a prefix, will it impact other routers which are not overflowing the source?

【A-WAJ】：No. RR can control when to send the RD-ORF message to the upstream/source router. 

For example, if only one PE overflow, RR can add the RD-ORF as its Adj-RIB-Out filter to this PE, and don’t send this message to the source PE, or other RR.

Theoretically, RR need only send such RD-ORF upstream when it can’t process the BGP Updates, or it is overflow. 

 

【Keyur】：The prefix filter level filtering has more expense than a higher level filters.

【A-WAJ】：RD based filter is also higher level filter.  RT based filter can’t solve the problems that described in this draft.

 

【Robert】: there was a number of technical problems sent to the list. None of these were addressed. This is not the right way to filter VPN

【A-WAJ】：Would you like to point out which technical problem isn’t addressed yet?  We have also compared the existing solutions and their limitations in the draft and at the presentation.

 

 

Best Regards

 

Aijun Wang

China Telecom 

 

From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of [e-mail]
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2020 4:47 PM
To: idr <[e-mail]>
Subject: [Idr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-idr-rd-orf-01.txt

 

Hi,IDR experts:

 

    Based on the previous discussion with Robert and Jakob, we update our draft as follows:

·       The differences between RD-ORF, RTC and Address Prefix ORF are briefly described;

·       The encoding of RD-ORF type-specific part is changed and the source address sub TLV field is added;

·       The application in single-domain scenario is added;

·       Four new types of sub-TLV are defined to carry the source address in different scenarios.

    Any comments are welcome.

 

Best Regards.

  _____  

 王巍  Wang Wei    

[phone]  
[phone]  
[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>   
------------------------------------------------------------------------  
CTNET2025研究所  
中国电信股份有限公司北京研究院  
China Telecom Corporation Limited Beijing Research Institute  
北京市昌平区北七家镇未来科技城南区中国电信北京信息科技创新园  
邮编：102209 

 

From: internet-drafts <mailto:[e-mail]> 

Date: 2020-07-28 16:17

To: Jie Dong <mailto:[e-mail]> ; Aijun Wang <mailto:[e-mail]> ; Shunwan Zhuang <mailto:[e-mail]> ; Wei Wang <mailto:[e-mail]> ; Haibo Wang <mailto:[e-mail]> 

Subject: New Version Notification for draft-wang-idr-rd-orf-01.txt

 

A new version of I-D, draft-wang-idr-rd-orf-01.txt

has been successfully submitted by Wei Wang and posted to the

IETF repository.

 

Name: draft-wang-idr-rd-orf

Revision: 01

Title: Route Distinguisher Outbound Route Filter (RD-ORF) for BGP-4

Document date: 2020-07-28

Group: Individual Submission

Pages: 14

URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-wang-idr-rd-orf-01.txt

Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wang-idr-rd-orf/

Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wang-idr-rd-orf-01

Htmlized:       https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-wang-idr-rd-orf

Diff:           https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-wang-idr-rd-orf-01

 

Abstract:

   This draft defines a new Outbound Route Filter (ORF) type, called the

   Route Distinguisher ORF (RD-ORF).  RD-ORF is applicable when the

   routers do not exchange VPN routing infomation directly (e.g. routers

   in single-domain connect via Route Reflector, or routers in Option B/

   Option C cross-domain scenario)..

 

                                                                                  

 

 

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission

until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

 

The IETF Secretariat