Re: [Idr] IETF LC for IDR-ish document <draft-ietf-grow-bgp-reject-05.txt> (Default EBGP Route Propagation Behavior Without Policies) to Proposed Standard

Keyur Patel <keyur@arrcus.com> Wed, 19 April 2017 20:43 UTC

Return-Path: <keyur@arrcus.com>
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 898A012D0C3 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 13:43:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.62
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.62 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=netorgft1331857.onmicrosoft.com
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 uvLHg_7ojIMF for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 13:43:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com (dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com [67.231.154.164]) (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 67135129C73 for <idr@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 13:43:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pure.maildistiller.com (unknown [10.110.50.29]) by dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com (Proofpoint Essentials ESMTP Server) with ESMTP id C263F8009A; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 20:43:39 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: Proofpoint Essentials engine
Received: from mx5-us1.ppe-hosted.com (unknown [10.110.49.251]) by pure.maildistiller.com (Proofpoint Essentials ESMTP Server) with ESMTPS id 792F560051; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 20:43:39 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from NAM01-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-sn1nam01lp0119.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.163.119]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx5-us1.ppe-hosted.com (Proofpoint Essentials ESMTP Server) with ESMTPS id 26763600094; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 20:43:35 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=NETORGFT1331857.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-arrcus-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=M6Ng+pgzybfErSobqpGz3M9tyt9aCUFnQ6jXCsCWGb0=; b=ZmTCE9RoVi2UpYTSVWdK2I5g66cxQ1vbMlIViipLM5Qakme7k+ZGS2icEEBP4c9+3X0bkkAQO2P/oCsm/1uySsxQhqLnbXUai0CFOEzG53yGCVASVZHdTg3g0jpVwoQOrLfDKQOanBF8z8Hd02kf+wp/x9055E0jbYqeGu7lTI8=
Received: from BY2PR18MB0262.namprd18.prod.outlook.com (10.163.72.152) by BY2PR18MB0263.namprd18.prod.outlook.com (10.163.72.153) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1034.10; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 20:43:33 +0000
Received: from BY2PR18MB0262.namprd18.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.72.152]) by BY2PR18MB0262.namprd18.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.72.152]) with mapi id 15.01.1034.018; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 20:43:33 +0000
From: Keyur Patel <keyur@arrcus.com>
To: "John G. Scudder" <jgs@juniper.net>, "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>
CC: Hares Susan <shares@ndzh.com>
Thread-Topic: [Idr] IETF LC for IDR-ish document <draft-ietf-grow-bgp-reject-05.txt> (Default EBGP Route Propagation Behavior Without Policies) to Proposed Standard
Thread-Index: AQHSuSz+QxMnaaMdpE6dWAZuvCqOqKHMs4OA
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 20:43:33 +0000
Message-ID: <9047A5A0-ED12-43C2-B2C5-D2A71CBB4373@arrcus.com>
References: <D4E812E8-AA7B-4EA2-A0AC-034AA8922306@juniper.net>
In-Reply-To: <D4E812E8-AA7B-4EA2-A0AC-034AA8922306@juniper.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: juniper.net; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;juniper.net; dmarc=none action=none header.from=arrcus.com;
x-originating-ip: [96.68.143.133]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BY2PR18MB0263; 7:mWc1uI7R2NboellcKuQMgb1MJXSlKM+GEX2/oXqThlCsgdrznnLStgGXyCPXBW9p2qFpdl+bvZNyL8okVILi2UFhYk7l3hjTECpABWs8oX4uyHwtM8EftLO/MM0X/ZQQbjnRO/fYY09IYqQRoMpEfI2PEewIfkxUTxh2PGfRpERkGEqV42evx/c5mC1QiKCBLsAF2YSz7PazpXHvSmAiObJ3wo2bJSHSB2iLfcDzMP0HIt7oZjRfCh8BjUJ9+xrdLiSbXnJ2N0/dQfnBTghspOIijgD2GSEyhPKdy7pqBVRvsNvcfgNQVB6ReYaXjaaV8Rej7caspmGBrHihWClv7Q==
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 65b85065-5607-4a07-f914-08d48764beb2
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(22001)(2017030254075)(201703131423075); SRVR:BY2PR18MB0263;
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BY2PR18MB0263C96A7049FAA59C132AB8C1180@BY2PR18MB0263.namprd18.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(120809045254105)(138986009662008);
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040450)(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(93006095)(93001095)(3002001)(10201501046)(6041248)(201703131423075)(201702281528075)(201703061421075)(20161123562025)(20161123560025)(2016111802025)(20161123555025)(20161123564025)(6072148)(6043046); SRVR:BY2PR18MB0263; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY2PR18MB0263;
x-forefront-prvs: 028256169F
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(6009001)(39830400002)(39400400002)(39410400002)(39450400003)(377454003)(24454002)(377424004)(33656002)(122556002)(83716003)(2906002)(86362001)(5660300001)(345774005)(53936002)(7736002)(305945005)(229853002)(25786009)(4326008)(6246003)(6116002)(82746002)(102836003)(3846002)(53546009)(81166006)(50986999)(54356999)(76176999)(8936002)(8676002)(2900100001)(189998001)(66066001)(6512007)(6486002)(77096006)(6506006)(2950100002)(2501003)(8666007)(99286003)(3660700001)(38730400002)(6306002)(6436002)(3280700002)(36756003)(24704002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:BY2PR18MB0263; H:BY2PR18MB0262.namprd18.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en;
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <4F368CDE8CCB6644B9909FE5599F1AB6@namprd18.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: arrcus.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 19 Apr 2017 20:43:33.0270 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 697b3529-5c2b-40cf-a019-193eb78f6820
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY2PR18MB0263
X-MDID: 1492634619-Zsh5X3IBnxvi
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/9Ig0aDsynUFK5wPKm7OnPz74iJw>
Subject: Re: [Idr] IETF LC for IDR-ish document <draft-ietf-grow-bgp-reject-05.txt> (Default EBGP Route Propagation Behavior Without Policies) to Proposed Standard
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 19 Apr 2017 20:43:44 -0000

Thank you John for bringing it on IDR. 

As an update to RFC4271, I am not sure if I agree with the EBGP policy configuration. There are lot of DC networks (for example) that use EBGP within their CLOS. This extension may not be applicable in such networks.

I would request authors to consider refining text to include appropriate EBGP use cases and not make it generic for EBGP sessions (defined in 4271).

Regards,
Keyur


On 4/19/17, 9:49 AM, "Idr on behalf of John G. Scudder" <idr-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of jgs@juniper.net>; wrote:

    IDR folks,
    
    As many of you have already noticed, draft-ietf-grow-bgp-reject-05 has completed GROW WGLC and is now in IETF LC.
    
    As nobody other than Alvaro noticed (thank you for noticing, Alvaro!) draft-ietf-grow-bgp-reject-05 represents an update to RFC 4271, in that it mandates what a BGP implementation MUST do. See section 2 of the draft for the details. It's short and easy to read.
    
    If we had noticed this earlier, we would have either chosen to home the document in IDR, or explicitly made an exception to have GROW do the work. Given that we didn't, though, the plan is to continue progressing the draft as a GROW document. However:
    
    - As I understand it, the authors will add the Updates: 4271 header in addition to potentially taking in other comments from AD review.
    - If anyone has a strong objection to the unusual procedure, please say so (either on-list, or to the chairs + AD).
    - Please send any last call comments to the IETF LC (see below) although it's also OK to discuss here on the IDR list of course.
    
    Many IDR participants are also active in GROW and have had their say, but if you haven't, now's your chance.
    
    Thanks,
    
    --John
    
    > Begin forwarded message:
    > 
    > From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>;
    > Subject: Last Call: <draft-ietf-grow-bgp-reject-05.txt> (Default EBGP Route Propagation Behavior Without Policies) to Proposed Standard
    > Date: April 18, 2017 at 5:16:05 PM EDT
    > To: "IETF-Announce" <ietf-announce@ietf.org>;
    > Cc: grow-chairs@ietf.org, grow@ietf.org, draft-ietf-grow-bgp-reject@ietf.org, christopher.morrow@gmail.com
    > Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org
    > 
    > 
    > The IESG has received a request from the Global Routing Operations WG
    > (grow) to consider the following document:
    > - 'Default EBGP Route Propagation Behavior Without Policies'
    > <draft-ietf-grow-bgp-reject-05.txt> as Proposed Standard
    > 
    > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
    > final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
    > ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2017-05-02. Exceptionally, comments may be
    > sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the
    > beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
    > 
    > Abstract
    > 
    >  This document defines the default behavior of a BGP speaker when
    >  there is no import or export policy associated with an External BGP
    >  session.
    > 
    > 
    > The file can be obtained via
    > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-grow-bgp-reject/
    > 
    > IESG discussion can be tracked via
    > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-grow-bgp-reject/ballot/
    > 
    > This IETF LC, which originally concluded on 2017-04-18, is being 
    > extended to allow for additional input to be provided. Ops AD (for GROW) 
    > and Routing AD (for IDR) wish to ensure that cross WG discussions have 
    > had a chance to occur.
    > 
    > No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
    
    _______________________________________________
    Idr mailing list
    Idr@ietf.org
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr