Re: [Idr] 2 week WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-shutdown-02 (1/17 to 1/31/2017)

Job Snijders <job@instituut.net> Sat, 28 January 2017 12:02 UTC

Return-Path: <job@instituut.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 E0B63129486 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 28 Jan 2017 04:02:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=instituut-net.20150623.gappssmtp.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 w8TtOTRLUzzA for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 28 Jan 2017 04:02:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wm0-x244.google.com (mail-wm0-x244.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::244]) (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 4163612948E for <idr@ietf.org>; Sat, 28 Jan 2017 04:02:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wm0-x244.google.com with SMTP id v77so3271808wmv.0 for <idr@ietf.org>; Sat, 28 Jan 2017 04:02:21 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=instituut-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=yHdWcI0+DtvwDnPgN59U73+VJl4uBnKXjxdAct5zCO0=; b=IDlnQ/ojEoeRu780TdOOuNHkIZ4OjfSKzvpfoHHoPNv/rJlafI+NwIZyIPlFYKJ+w5 T+PMIGw2a45vJePtsUTX1ZxpEEqcnethVizdSgC6Ve7mbT4pi3eGxrfEw7JP/WKfMxKN EL1q4hf0BPlTM9+aeOwms2WsE/rrAQdkf6lMamrpqMu8h82zRmahOvQrhued7dX+PgMe v4NmZ+lM1WuloF8sHkvJ8AMG0zZx30FPEhyzOY8aq3pjBPoEa70vc2kSVaxN2QcrVcBO GGWAAn5DhGqHdSCCD6onVl/xoR5HGJK7v+UXBTB9ZjGiUaQaOSWrtc1Me3loqsWjpeKU 4F+g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=yHdWcI0+DtvwDnPgN59U73+VJl4uBnKXjxdAct5zCO0=; b=ksD23mSKbJugMMUQgjGe1PFGU/dXTIScSXyR/oFXvVvir+D6dgglXBwX2RrvOP/BAk cPc5RMgy6fVX2zN3ucmabPsW9LHJzcQ35xAjVINNZoRJr/BKDAgqbwGF/NpTtpAcY+nx sbP1POcBQeO3eyGqS83gxHes4HAB52iEhXa0e9xXclPMc1mDvEB/tiTXLO7fDDY9eRHl d1wv0wQRK5+Ip424cBiD2B8NOKWw60/fUc45Rx2+347ocHwsv7Xiu6xHzkNBLlYHxKG/ 8QmjObWUIc/JOPfZhv1IVnfPuarJx0nyG+ght6OdXiGI6rK/FCtr7FydBkw8ZtwK6e4c /KmA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXKcgRtuM9rypenWHo5HmAN2Yf6io80v9k+kPoVMuz2rWiaUhU1jSVzMGepzPDKpcw==
X-Received: by 10.223.164.10 with SMTP id d10mr10890259wra.90.1485604939529; Sat, 28 Jan 2017 04:02:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([2001:67c:208c:10:5878:ee0d:a48e:58d2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s26sm12504864wra.26.2017.01.28.04.02.17 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 28 Jan 2017 04:02:18 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2017 13:02:17 +0100
From: Job Snijders <job@instituut.net>
To: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>
Message-ID: <20170128120217.GA91223@Vurt.local>
References: <01b801d27105$45702bc0$d0508340$@ndzh.com> <20170127213832.GA20988@pfrc.org> <CADLW2vwFPikHb9=+V7oQ-HTQPu+s1S5e_B0x8yai8wLB-4z6Tw@mail.gmail.com> <20170128020205.GA3201@pfrc.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170128020205.GA3201@pfrc.org>
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.2 (2016-11-26)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/9mgo9FyOJNL2yE-QvZ7EgyqPg60>
Cc: idr@ietf.org, draft-ietf-idr-shutdown@ietf.org, Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
Subject: Re: [Idr] 2 week WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-shutdown-02 (1/17 to 1/31/2017)
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Sat, 28 Jan 2017 12:02:24 -0000

Hi group,

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 09:02:05PM -0500, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 03:21:19PM -0800, Matthew Walster wrote:
> > On 27 January 2017 at 13:38, Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > I believe the draft should cover both administrative sub-codes.
> > > [...] Suggestions of other cases to expand the text-form of the
> > > notification to other sub-codes.
> 
> > There is obvious scope-creep at this point, I would like to suggest
> > either the draft considered as-is or to allow all Cease sub-codes to
> > have shutdown communication possible.
> 
> I certainly hadn't intended to try to push for a more general widening
> of the scope; just point out something under the existing use case.
> 
> While you give three other examples of places that could benefit from
> additional data regarding why the session has been sent a CEASE, I
> don't think all of them are equally clear with respect to that data
> being text.
> 
> As an example, the max prefixes might benefit from a simple tuple.
> E.g. AFI,SAFI,<limit>. Although keeping this within even a
> light-weight TLV would permit space for the machine-readable portion
> along with a human readable one.
> 
> I would suggest in the absence of a strong case for text strings in
> the other sub-codes that for now the draft stay restricted to the
> administrative reset cases. As this draft proves, if there's consenus
> to add additional DATA to one of the code points, it can move fast.

I think Jeff's suggestion to add the Administrative Reset (subcode 4)
case is a good one. There can be value in attachting contact information
or a case identifier to BGP resets. Matthew mentioned (outside of this
mailing list) that this information would especially be useful if after
the reset, the BGP session does not re-establish. Also, conceptually the
'reset' and 'shutdown' are close to each other as they are initiated by
the Administrator.

However, I consider the other subcodes out of scope for what
draft-ietf-idr-shutdown tries to accomplish, and as such would belong in
their own Internet-Draft.

Kind regards,

Job