[Idr] WG Work item call - Opinions on work items (3/5/2016 to 3/17/2016) and adoption of draft-hares-idr-flowspec-combo-01.txt
"Susan Hares" <shares@ndzh.com> Sat, 05 March 2016 22:49 UTC
Return-Path: <shares@ndzh.com>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5EA21B381C for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 5 Mar 2016 14:49:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -94.358
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-94.358 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, DOS_OUTLOOK_TO_MX=2.845, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RDNS_NONE=0.793, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=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 PJWB8juAU2nB for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 5 Mar 2016 14:49:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hickoryhill-consulting.com (unknown [50.245.122.97]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ADD191B381B for <idr@ietf.org>; Sat, 5 Mar 2016 14:49:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=loggedin (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=74.43.47.30;
From: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
To: idr@ietf.org
Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2016 17:48:40 -0500
Message-ID: <000b01d17731$29d17230$7d745690$@ndzh.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000C_01D17707.40FFFE10"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AdF3MOvE/JSvgLOkQ3a9MB8GleM7AQ==
Content-Language: en-us
X-Authenticated-User: skh@ndzh.com
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/5E1aISGi3RjddQuLmocaVdDEXaU>
Subject: [Idr] WG Work item call - Opinions on work items (3/5/2016 to 3/17/2016) and adoption of draft-hares-idr-flowspec-combo-01.txt
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2016 22:49:18 -0000
The interim on 3/7/2016 will have a discussion of revisions to the BGP Flow specification (BGP-FS) to add more features. There are two suggested options: 1) A minimal features to existing BGP-FS (option 1) Add a few new match filters to the BGP-FS NLRI and few new actions to the BGP-FS actions (in Extended communities). Actions would need to be done in a defined order. Each new actions would need to define conflicts with existing actions. Best use case: DoS attack prevention 2) Create a BGP-FS version 2 (option 2) Create a new BGP-FS NLRI (v2) with a field that indicates the ordering of the BGP NLRI. Add new BGP-FS actions with an order field in the BGP Wide Communities. Filters are done in the order defined in the filter. Actions are done in the order defined in the actions. Order numbers that tie are handled in a defined order. Best use case: SDN/NFV filter management A write-up on the issues and proposed solutions is contained in: draft-hares-idr-flowspec-combo-01.txt. <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hares-idr-flowspec-combo/> The WG can select both option 1 and option 2. This is a WG work item call for input to the chairs on the scope of the WG item. In you discussion of this topics, the chairs would appreciate if you would indicate if you would support IDR working on option 1, option 2 or both option 1 and 2. This WG call items also includes a call for draft-hares-idr-flowspec-combo-01.txt as a write-up of the work-item options. The WG may wish to split this draft into multiple drafts. The following drafts are being consider for either option: 1) draft-eddy-idr-flowspec-packet-rate 2) draft-hao-idr-flowspec-nv03 3) draft-hao-idr-flowspec-label 4) draft-liang-idr-bgp-flowspec-time 5) draft-litowski-idr-flowspec-interfaceset 6) draft-vandevelde-idr-flowspec-path-redirect 7) draft-li-idr-flowspec-rpd-01.txt 8) draft-wu-idr-flowspec-yang.cfg. If you wish to comment on any of these drafts, we will We will conclude the Call for WG opinions on 3/17/2016 so these authors can have a day to revise and submit their drafts before the draft deadline. Sue Hares and John Scudder PS: draft-li-idr-flowspec-rpd discusses limits on the distribution of the policy which has been recast in draft-hares-idr-flowspec-combo as a bgp-wide community of Container type 1 with an atom of BGP Flow Specification ordering. However, this draft is included in the list to be able to update the mechanism from this draft into that context. The yang model for BGP Flow specification is also included in this work item as it will need to be modified based on the approaches. The yang model is in draft-wu-idr-flowspec-yang-cfg. In your comments, please indicate if you feel these drafts or other drafts.
- [Idr] WG Work item call - Opinions on work items … Susan Hares
- Re: [Idr] WG Work item call - Opinions on work it… Gunter Van De Velde
- Re: [Idr] WG Work item call - Opinions on work it… Susan Hares
- Re: [Idr] WG Work item call - Opinions on work it… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [Idr] WG Work item call - Opinions on work it… Gunter Van De Velde
- Re: [Idr] WG Work item call - Opinions on work it… Susan Hares
- [Idr] 答复: WG Work item call - Opinions on work it… Dongjie (Jimmy)
- Re: [Idr] ??: WG Work item call - Opinions on wor… Lucy yong
- Re: [Idr] ??: WG Work item call - Opinions on wor… Haoweiguo
- Re: [Idr] ??: WG Work item call - Opinions on wor… Linda Dunbar
- Re: [Idr] WG Work item call - Opinions on work it… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [Idr] WG Work item call - Opinions on work it… Susan Hares