IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-idr-rd-orf-03.txt

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Wed, 26 August 2020 16:08 UTC

Return-Path: <robert@raszuk.net>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01E6D3A0FDA for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 09:08:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=raszuk.net
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 BvmILku8o3z9 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 09:08:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ed1-x530.google.com (mail-ed1-x530.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::530]) (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 781633A0E8C for <idr@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 09:08:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ed1-x530.google.com with SMTP id ba12so1124622edb.2 for <idr@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 09:08:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=raszuk.net; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=8E/J17YH0I0kJwjJHYQ6UVrItQ8zW6WOj8/f0VNA8uA=; b=adgqaoWM1QTVhIeVpYBp75bdPH8vt9MZf4JF/6DnNXzEW1572LAnynoOvxiNQWPQlj zM/cnDM9vOonIayUSKDuyEghI7qMwhTlnnjnZTtn2B4RDCYcT9JRvv7dJTiWzN6Pf44n 2t7Q0KaLk/1vh0k0Egly5dvjvTsD9ZjFIFu5H48kCueWsk1RzTqYAniu8Whf81xHHjfA w+AHDNzndixPncy2NccHgx90kEaBOEgot2SaaKEqrzpsxfKFx7OK/ICE+X8MQ176Xe7t /Sd/UHHPztY6mJWCfFu0UMpsx942PXIWaAbnw4LiSTMwmfdE5PHdOZ7bu1a8Rej0p2IT iQVQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=8E/J17YH0I0kJwjJHYQ6UVrItQ8zW6WOj8/f0VNA8uA=; b=EGbHwZNWNIISPpJtLUOXOZtrRypsPjWRmo5MLatvPCh6DJVmVXK8j38AtbuZLT/Y+6 zXFr9Fr7ghYUvJvEQ4l0n1tz5fTc+Fejn8kA6r1z+Wullc6G4zbJ44WQv4biv1fRJEzX 9ulqBmC0x9FzMrmgdVD7m2QBwp3nOM6ehL7J6SgVh4OMfftq01W5JGdLZL2kH+QvWQ11 zBmnwKV84uWVU71G1Ovz1cAoi3gLE39vUAtpIQDE9ii4IvpAoyQ7hiaJiFPWYl9ZOxLr hPnvb8fDvdq2vUIXrOYszEdwrlqyWCgdRI7cogEbD9LqN0to3RJ8cjtiQllzu6HKHRxT CcDw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533XgesJVTq2qsuG+CkTpoo48FlpJCjsXiZHqQ/kH77AqKLFHiBs OhL/jD9Yb4+W8gQeZKegqcW8mAFPpRohfGlF+ATm0A==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz0exX9T8wSJ6JFf6gpelHAXIHIom3D31CBtRKNhMAi3NytUCC2xRmzcmVls4QWf75egeSbL9+y7F6P0tnYDIM=
X-Received: by 2002:a50:8e1a:: with SMTP id 26mr15964949edw.120.1598458112816; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 09:08:32 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <tencent_EA7B36E1CC8F28E736B6F6623DB239F57907@qq.com> <CAOj+MME8i2D1BP8A1fRcye0D+VySMi==wzr_uhmCBm2ydSonLQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABNhwV1fnVtKwCaQ7SrdK8fzdHD7BbGijWZCuQ2MxG8XbVghow@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABNhwV1fnVtKwCaQ7SrdK8fzdHD7BbGijWZCuQ2MxG8XbVghow@mail.gmail.com>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 18:08:22 +0200
Message-ID: <CAOj+MMGQqC8zkyRfouz_8z0355GvbFw1JW8aAY5vE6B6zXHT4w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
Cc: "UTTARO, JAMES" <ju1738@att.com>, Wei Wang <weiwang94@foxmail.com>, idr <idr@ietf.org>, "wangw36@chinatelecom.cn" <wangw36@chinatelecom.cn>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000000db9d05adca08d5"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/7wNVh7JI2vo2UV6ZgJVWC219fIU>
Subject: Re: [Idr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-idr-rd-orf-03.txt
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 16:08:36 -0000

> Gyan> The primary use case is for inter as opt a or b flood of routes and
there it is very difficult to control
> in either scenario as it is going between administrative domains.

For inter-as option A you should use prefix limit between VRFs.

For inter-as option B & C it is very seldom to see opening up anyone's
network across different admin domains. Lot's of things can break. The only
deployments I have seen for option B & C were across multiple domains under
the *same* administration.

However if you are concerned about B & C I would rather ask your vendor to
provide perfix limit on a per RD basis for VPNv4/v6 or EVPN sessions - no
best path run needed. Very simple implementation extension and you are
protected without any bgp protocol extensions.

Thx,
R.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email