Re: [Idr] BGP autodiscovery design team

Job Snijders <job@instituut.net> Thu, 05 December 2019 22:55 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 DCD0B120168 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 14:55:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 OntyKPk6Vr3L for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 14:55:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ot1-x335.google.com (mail-ot1-x335.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::335]) (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 B786B1200EF for <idr@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 14:55:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ot1-x335.google.com with SMTP id i15so4145140oto.7 for <idr@ietf.org>; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 14:55:13 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=instituut-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=uB3LZ+HzjhwqIzHqBFL8s1yM7EzAdqbcfLJSorrdz/Q=; b=dpXXPFV7Fs716s7XdLpPW9m+zh9FCDunq3lDi8dojF082cvxY2kcgwhOYlu8IaVDgx xLs0oIXW6x45ef8fI60EEjIlXZDpuTChpNC6By7XcfRcLBfMFzq15r1N0mXaxINE7LkX cCSaDgHJznr2OfH+46cZbkvcYnhyG6lRDAPSzYJLI5Vg6lYxLybfrpVXbrAld1lNLvwO Ei9w2spE/3p+4vXeQbT2dilHsXZjmhCPRvGGRs958wae9AVV0Wn/AiIygKP9CIPbl18C nivU2I4D6WJJAaW+EYNRov6d38tIQ9Ap30V3YbinPaduJt+puHM3rFcjKFNz6lP9Zt9n LuoQ==
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=uB3LZ+HzjhwqIzHqBFL8s1yM7EzAdqbcfLJSorrdz/Q=; b=Z6bs30l3Pry0X7JDXT/XMVLutubWRXGmKDMIpZVvYHuGdJE4Dqgy6oHXLzJv8p/Hju XlOqGA5wEg5L9p9KB2dBryTwOHawAzVUIgSzhBNnC9GI9c7c1ENlBq/eMI7Gll71hRzU RRtGWpHbaykV9dqxWfvQ3ClgUEED3DCqwGzXy9Wek3wdeAk4T/Gl1v+k447pySxm47aq KQeEv16f6QPJE/f27kzh7JBAVEJx008M/lVS7dzzo3sPNed87/Oj08SL+DHinm7neppq pYk1BifMqnJdwTa5CNggoaeKoiGdrTeWbcgb/oSYINL7EbRRz7e/SSoWqCJJcbqA2ZZA 76/w==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXzBucKGyDGXprBxRpf2MpfwvfUDc9o+aJk1Dkd4JXd8/AQuEL3 dqPqXSj9BSGZpGLoNcmLOarBPC+oRcvvTtJ5jyPC/w==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwaoVvKlwi+0wuG3OyUkB25SbcussvxUjwNKNf04ivjTIJk8af8SN1cf0m7p3Ycp0CEIBFm8naFgfgrwUhQQ+w=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:574:: with SMTP id f20mr8357796otc.71.1575586511968; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 14:55:11 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <E7E38075-54F2-4F16-97BE-EE24943B5BFE@juniper.net> <CAOj+MMG7d4H2R_aZU0xQoW+a=wvgqn1oaOPQb-L1NJ2qX_07cg@mail.gmail.com> <B17A6910EEDD1F45980687268941550F4DA2809D@MISOUT7MSGUSRCD.ITServices.sbc.com> <m25ziuv1fg.wl-randy@psg.com>
In-Reply-To: <m25ziuv1fg.wl-randy@psg.com>
From: Job Snijders <job@instituut.net>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2019 23:55:00 +0100
Message-ID: <CACWOCC_nxysm3ibGXgPzKSjURg79J9wt24pCm9Xgn4WiyLuCEQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Cc: "UTTARO, JAMES" <ju1738@att.com>, idr wg <idr@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005be5740598fcd282"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/Cc8DYejQTOAMJhhTchdRkIHcM9M>
Subject: Re: [Idr] BGP autodiscovery design team
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: Thu, 05 Dec 2019 22:55:16 -0000

On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 23:43 Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>; wrote:

> > I agree with Roberts’ point. Prior to crafting or selecting a draft as
> > the basis for a proposal the design team should clearly articulate the
> > scope, use cases and requirements that need to be addressed. IMO
> > stating that in an informational RFC is a good way to ensure that all
> > stakeholders are in agreement as to what the eventual
> > specification/draft addresses, and as important does not address.
>
> while i am tempted to agree with you, i see it from a different vector.
>
> imiho, if we agreed to constrain solutions to the absolute minimal
> mechanism, we might be able to cover a significant subset of clos, ibgp,
> inter-provider, and ixp.
>
> if we do not constrain to the minimial mechanism, we will make a complex
> and disgusting mess of boiling the ocean on {pick any one of the above}.
>
> i think it was tony hoare who said something such as
>
>    there are two kinds of standards,
>      - the intersection of what everybody *must* have


I would be interested to help achieve exactly the above.

Hopefully we can manage that in a way that doesn’t harm internet routing
from a security perspective. :-)

Kind regards,

Job

>