Re: [Idr] One Administrative Domain using BGP (Fwd: I-D Action: draft-uttaro-idr-bgp-oad-00.txt)

[Donatas Abraitis <[e-mail]>]

Hi all,

>Is this going to be transitive or not across the ASN boundary with OAD
session ?

This draft
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-attribute-announcement-03
would be a handful in such a situation.

>We considered the need for a capability from a couple of different points
of view, and both resulted in not wanting to require one.

For instance, BGP role capability does almost the same as it should in this
proposal (OAD).

On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 1:32 AM Nick Hilliard <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Robert Raszuk wrote on 15/03/2023 21:14:
> > Where do you see in this draft that authors state that MED will be now
> > transitive across OAD-ASNs ?
>
> here you go:
>
> > However, EBGP-OAD speakers are also allowed to
> >    announce and receive any IBGP-only or non-transitive attributes that
> >    were restricted to remain within an Autonomous System [RFC4271].
>
> > Why would you not use AIGP instead ?
>
> because it might be preferable to use localpref instead of MED. Here's
> the front-end UI element to support this:
>
> >
> https://github.com/inex/IXP-Manager/blob/master/resources/views/interfaces/core-bundle/edit/edit-wizard.foil.php#L106-L111
>
> This code was committed some years back.  We'd like to see this in
> production, without confeds.
>
> Nick
>
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>


-- 
Donatas