Re: [Idr] Adoption of draft-djsmith-bgp-flowspec-oid-01 as IDR WG document

One comment and one question on the draft.

1) I believe the rule should cover checks for AS4_PATH as well.

2) Section 6 from RFC5575

<snip>
BGP implementations MUST also enforce that the AS_PATH attribute of a
   route received via the External Border Gateway Protocol (eBGP)
   contains the neighboring AS in the left-most position of the AS_PATH
   attribute.  While this rule is optional in the BGP specification, it
   becomes necessary to enforce it for security reasons.
<snip>

Do we need to do a complete aspath check instead? Otherwise, a neighboring
AS can inject a bogus flowspec route?

Regards,
Keyur

On 5/16/12 1:19 PM, "Robert Raszuk" <robert@raszuk.net> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I support the adoption of this draft as WG document.
> 
> However the new text authors added between -00 and -01 seems too
> restrictive to the original theme/direction.
> 
> It says:
> 
> ".. or the AS_PATH attribute of the flow specification is empty."
> 
> That precludes injecting and honoring the flow routes even within the
> same administrative domain in the presence of confederations.
> 
> I recommend that this limitation should be removed in next version.
> 
> Regards,
> R.
> 
> 
> 
>> Folks,
>> 
>> We have received a request from the authors to adopt
>> draft-djsmith-bgp-flowspec-oid-01 as an IDR WG document.  Please send
>> your comments to the list.  The deadline for comments is June 1, 2012
>> at noon EDT.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> --John _______________________________________________ Idr mailing
>> list Idr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>> 
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> Idr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr