Re: [Idr] Transport Instance BGP

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Fri, 31 July 2020 22:06 UTC

Return-Path: <robert@raszuk.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 E70623A0BFD for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 15:06:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.088
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.088 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_REMOTE_IMAGE=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=raszuk.net
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 1R97uqyoMTgi for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 15:06:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ej1-x631.google.com (mail-ej1-x631.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::631]) (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 1037F3A0B96 for <idr@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 15:06:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ej1-x631.google.com with SMTP id w9so32829198ejc.8 for <idr@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 15:06:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=raszuk.net; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=vc6BE0s/A+O585uCXnsqIFOSzO3RTkBQIU4LwwsiOBk=; b=P+7O5Ur+3eVgunobqc8kEUuq/+h/u8N8l/zBa3GQwRuWYO/+f3Tf4P1HvaqzEBKQr2 xUfg7dge3W6rXaTImD5BLsIUNLEaUrZ6Jr+hdHzsgXiMKbeNw168eMZ0XFonL0fwzoF0 LQayguwpTZ5CBUtXhE0nYWNosxnlaItVGt6HnHbDv1FuZW1wC5B/QB8hQHO/JxR288g/ qVeLfpRlpqp8BKZMVOlezhUnfXap6YhXdYNEEc+0/nQ4RJaJlqEM/wQVTIKfXTcTOnDp iIOvUjmQcIQzFiZJlPwJfiVCd5MKFs9YbmW8m8Ijv+gLmCmxrkYESdzrnEyfv3hPgmYd udFA==
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=vc6BE0s/A+O585uCXnsqIFOSzO3RTkBQIU4LwwsiOBk=; b=E4/1ITW4tTN3lbw63oxRCYyZZ90yBxeY8f92RpmOsVeshKGoo72VWqsT+rT/+ib9xF jsvLWU+rS2XIDYNzjc9WGO3+lpHL66XYuhkxc8NFy/W04o94e4+LFYyJjsrPq6pD9c9X d7DOHvCSk9r9TSZEBlbros8KefjH25kxAB58xw1u3p8roqz6eG1jR03d8PI7JYUbPZ+K 7X3q2dQdpw4DEjIYgBUBcmJGQK4CD6AeKkF1EYYgOBWfZLcjm+YSS8vRX6GsqG3eC4nf ABHPDkm/mObNlUXq2asjyiSQpauwrsmt9Ohi7fLmtyLVfTn0Cjbo71v09HwJUDLDI3QW Gq0A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532d4P6vw7cClp8z87LwdlwVI6ihLaZ6QIq4jH+UpoDzOD/dUQRX iN+uFgCUI6+zppmB683hT5TocrM8bcFFIF5M4YR26A==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwAYyl7imgbGBrPRQrKTBvfgypV8/m3j4/uGMUK2Phx/1eN0DGkZXsqL8hsGgmsONeyvWpqpHfoUBcctMmM6b8=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:7b48:: with SMTP id n8mr6050315ejo.110.1596233160165; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 15:06:00 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <SN6PR13MB23347FC0BC5212B52E62591385750@SN6PR13MB2334.namprd13.prod.outlook.com> <CAOj+MMFqFaQ3e6voR-4LyZaAwY2VVX12h_z8tTtJMV+y9KJjyw@mail.gmail.com> <SN6PR13MB2334CCDC36A49DC07F05946485720@SN6PR13MB2334.namprd13.prod.outlook.com> <CAOj+MMHOt+7-suB9Y3cRbC0osM5i+-ueNaGUjfVO3iShUF276Q@mail.gmail.com> <214FC810-D50E-4F48-96AB-0DAB894FBB8A@icloud.com> <CAOj+MMF+61OiddMSp_y2Cq+Fb-YVh4R=7azTRiTnfz3tXazfaQ@mail.gmail.com> <a411014fb097445a8445d5b1b4953de1@huawei.com> <CAOj+MMGqe6694O1yTOPKTyxFBTj208S8-C4ywm=W-vjmfjASPQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABNhwV3LPDLsK2-+eW=vFQOes4bXah-yWjVah5jLSWB+0wR+xg@mail.gmail.com> <CAOj+MMHCwDT7q_5FSZeJPENpNwdzZ1xMU6Mr5GUOqMiLuEreag@mail.gmail.com> <CABNhwV2soMenXnxEtKif17ePBhq244VTXqvv1R5ddMpfFFsdSQ@mail.gmail.com> <m2o8nwgvy2.wl-randy@psg.com> <CAOj+MMEySNspsm+1vcHdwDHd3qeSzgj=Da2YgrkMR55b2zYHug@mail.gmail.com> <CABNhwV0ae3+tdfXvjjRpUGLamK+Lxwms6YpKKpnMmA3PKj-8mQ@mail.gmail.com> <952c3e07-4666-41fc-8377-f26265d95d5a@Spark>
In-Reply-To: <952c3e07-4666-41fc-8377-f26265d95d5a@Spark>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2020 00:05:49 +0200
Message-ID: <CAOj+MMG9rZjtsQV1dpC6K3mCfhorXPAG_tUe6=1ba0BF0Pt7vg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>, Greg Skinner <gregskinner0@icloud.com>, "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007dab0405abc3fe52"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/E4hftKgF3kYx0YpZDGGAoXDaqlo>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Transport Instance BGP
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: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 22:06:07 -0000

Hi Jeff,

Can you provide any references to other proposals aiming at this space
within BGP ?

Thank you,
R.

On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 12:03 AM Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>
wrote:

> There had been a variety of proposals (to my memory) to decouple
> BGP(kitchen sink) from BGP(reachability).
> I’d be all in to rejuvenate this effort, and use Robert’ document as the
> starting point.
>
> Cheers,
> Jeff
> On Jul 31, 2020, 2:26 PM -0700, Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>om>,
> wrote:
>
>
> Sounds like plan.
>
> I like the win-win for BGP.👍
>
> Those two camps Service Provider and  Enterprise are closely aligning and
> converging as a major the variable is size, and if the private closed
> domain is a worldwide massive network, they are very close to being
> completely aligned as is the case with Verizon and maybe other Tier 1 and
> Tier 2 providers.  Of course the closed domain bar can swing from tiny to
> massive which is your point. Agreed.
>
> I agree on the former however the IETF has individual representation from
> all camps thus the world we live in and cannot satisfy everyone but the bar
> can swing from small to large.  Finding the happy medium is a challenge but
> that is part of our job in achieving WG consensus and IETF adoption on any
> protocol specification.
>
> That being said from an IETF and protocol development perspective you have
> to think of the trickle down of the protocol specifications as it applies
> to all vendors and all routers switches appliances you name it that runs
> any protocol or specification developed - ospf Isis BGP MPLS SR etc.
>
> Since that protocol specification developed by the IETF can sit on a tiny
> CPE box running BGP MPLS SR or even BIER or commodify incumbent hardware
> vendor Service Provider massive OTN box with high 400G density, or NFV
> server - router VNFs, or 1RU pizza box white box running disaggregated
> software from incumbent commodity vendor, the IETF standard is a standard
> for all implementation of the protocol specification independent of
> hardware mode or brand big or small it applies to every vendor development
> and implementing software.
>
>
> Kind Regards
>
> Gyan
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 6:48 AM Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> wrote:
>
>> Very true ... we could always rename it to "Internet routing related"
>>
>> In fact this should be win-win for both ... more stable Internet on one
>> hand and lower bar for new twicks and mangling with BESS like or NETCONF
>> like insertions to essentially a p2mp path vector protocol.
>>
>> In fact we see it more and more these days (example SRv6-NP long
>> discussions) where Internet engineering and stability and close domain
>> network design and engineering do not align. They are very different and
>> trying to either stretch one or trim the other what we see in number of
>> IETF WGs is just not the right thing to do.
>>
>> One would think that IETF as the name says is about the former ... but if
>> we see RFCs and drafts maybe just a small percentage of them indicates so.
>> Almost like the "I" there stands for IP and not Internet ....
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 6:17 AM Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
>>
>>> > Please review this draft and let Robert and myself know if its
>>> something
>>> > worth reviving.
>>> >
>>> > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-raszuk-ti-bgp-01
>>>
>>> imiho, there are a lot of things currently called "routing related" i
>>> would throw on the other side of that wall.
>>>
>>> randy
>>>
>> --
>
> <http://www.verizon.com/>
>
> *Gyan Mishra*
>
> *Network Solutions A**rchitect *
>
>
>
> *M 301 502-1347 13101 Columbia Pike *Silver Spring, MD
>
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> Idr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>
>