Re: [Idr] draft-wang-idr-vpn-prefix-orf-00.txt- Adoption call (2/4/2022 to 2/18/2022)

[Speaking as an individual contributor.]

Sue,

I do not support adoption of this draft.

After various discussions about the scope of the feature the authors seem to intend that:
- It address exhaustion by a Provider Edge device of RIB (and subsequently FIB) resources.
- Part of the concern is BGP messaging load on the receiving PE.
- This can be mitigated by causing remote drop of some portion of impactful routes.

The proposal has the issues that it:
- Will require additional per-route per-VRF counter state (potentially useful, somewhat expensive to implement)
- Does not provide an algorithm to determine drop, meaning no consistent local implementation of the feature.
- Does not address edge conditions wherein multiple classes of routes may be eligible for drop
- Will impose additional load on upstream BGP devices such as route reflectors to implement the filters
- Cannot guarantee prompt mitigation of the issues of concern.  Local filtering will be required as a mitigation during ORF installation at the upstream device.
- Installation of the ORF will generate additional messages for the withdraw messaging.

Much of the conversation about local PE behaviors amounts to, "I'll know it when I see it".  Implementation choice may be reasonable, but is too vague for the local end of a standard.

Discussion of this feature has resulted in the specification improving its clarity, but I don't foresee the above points converging across the disagreeing parties.

My recommendation is that if the authors wish to progress this proposal that they make it Experimental, request a First Come, First Served ORF code point from IANA, and take the draft to the Independent Submissions Editor track.

-- Jeff

> On Feb 4, 2022, at 7:39 AM, Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com> wrote:
> 
> Resending the adoption call – with the appropriate header 
>  
> From: Idr [mailto:idr-bounces@ietf.org <mailto:idr-bounces@ietf.org>] On Behalf Of Susan Hares
> Sent: Friday, February 4, 2022 7:33 AM
> To: idr@ietf.org <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
> Subject: [Idr] draft-wang-idr-vpn-prefix-orf-00.txt : (2/4/2022 to 2/18/2022)
>  
> This begins a 2 week WG adoption call  for 
> draft-wang-idr-vpn-prefix-orf-00.txt 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wang-idr-vpn-prefix-orf <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wang-idr-vpn-prefix-orf>. 
>  
> In your discussion on adoption, please consider the following questions: 
>  
> 1) Does this draft describe problems existing in networks today? 
>  
> 2) Does the solution describe address these problems? 
> The solution has both a general solution and BGP encodings. 
>  
> 3) Would the solution be useful in networks today? 
>  
> Thank you, Susan Hares 
> <Untitled attachment 00214.txt>_______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> Idr@ietf.org <mailto:Idr@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>