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

Aijun Wang <> Wed, 05 August 2020 02:34 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C97653A120F for <>; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 19:34:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YQucDGrfmKiE for <>; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 19:34:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA0BD3A1086 for <>; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 19:34:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from DESKTOP2IOH5QC (unknown []) by (Hmail) with ESMTPA id 0CEB047354; Wed, 5 Aug 2020 10:34:46 +0800 (CST)
From: "Aijun Wang" <>
To: <>, <>, "'idr'" <>
Cc: <>
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 10:34:41 +0800
Message-ID: <059401d66ad0$f96c3b50$ec44b1f0$>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0595_01D66B14.079547B0"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Content-Language: zh-cn
Thread-Index: AdZqzfBah49+Wx4xQuqf6VA+pgPE+Q==
X-HM-Tid: 0a73bc7896249865kuuu0ceb047354
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Idr] [Responses for the comments during the IETF108] New Version Notification for draft-wang-idr-rd-orf-01.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2020 02:34:56 -0000

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: [] On Behalf Of
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2020 4:47 PM
To: idr <>
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    

+86-177-7809-6050 <>   
China Telecom Corporation Limited Beijing Research Institute  


From: internet-drafts <> 

Date: 2020-07-28 16:17

To: Jie Dong <> ; Aijun Wang <> ; Shunwan Zhuang <> ; Wei Wang <> ; Haibo Wang <> 

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








   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


The IETF Secretariat