Re: [Idr] WG adoption call for draft-abraitis-bgp-version-capability-08, to end September 25

[tom petch <[e-mail]>]

From: Idr <[e-mail]> on behalf of John Scudder <jgs=[e-mail]>
Sent: 09 September 2020 20:04

(Co-chair hat)

On Sep 9, 2020, at 2:19 PM, Robert Raszuk <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:

Well last time I checked BGP is rather needed for the Internet. And this is major focus here to keep The Internet running.

I just went and checked our charter, because I was convinced that this point was explicitly part of it. It’s not. "The main objective of the working group is to support the use of BGP-4 by IP version 4 and IP version 6 networks.”

<tp>
A charter that calls for us to produce a MIB-2 for BGP4, no mention of a YANG model:-)

I think that since that charter was written much has been added to BGP and, like Robert, I have a concern that one day we may add the straw that breaks the camel's back.  When the WG was asked, some time ago, whether or not yet another feature should be added to BGP, I was against it, for that reason, but in the rough.  Many, if not most problems, come from change and while most changes are fault-free, there is always a slight risk in adding something that this one will not be.  I see it as benefit versus risk and am ambivalent about this; some benefit, some risk.

But when Alvaro reviewed this for the IESG as an ISE submission, I got the sense that the IESG would not hinder publication so I expect to see this being published, hopefully without mishap, whether or not the IDR WG agrees.  Adoption means more review so I suppose adoption is a good thing.

Tom Petch


Nonetheless, I think it would be hard to find someone who thinks it’s OK to break the Internet. I don’t think evidence has been presented that this proposal would do that, but it’s completely fair to ask that the question be thought through.

—John