Re: [Idr] IETF LC for IDR-ish document <draft-ietf-grow-bgp-reject-05.txt> (Default EBGP Route Propagation Behavior Without Policies) to Proposed Standard

Enke Chen <enkechen@cisco.com> Thu, 20 April 2017 21:25 UTC

Return-Path: <enkechen@cisco.com>
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 C51CF129C48 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Apr 2017 14:25:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.523
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.523 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 lo3YuMBmSfCI for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Apr 2017 14:25:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-5.cisco.com (alln-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.142.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 51BC11316CC for <idr@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Apr 2017 14:25:32 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1026; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1492723532; x=1493933132; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=M4ODk2yWhLyntV7MysR5U4Fmic4FoGGfuKMv3wj4eJw=; b=jlxRyqBQIMLfZif1H29i4n4BiuSGTv4/z/QVfqbBn8lKiuuIu1i0rreS by+lvtj2Z5SYktlQUhdofyPpDqKwV7hhM5kQJ3eyFieUdWJqqQo8x2lYO ESpUJEU3PzgF+U2excqu4pRNrOb+4wrjvPjlaVobPiCgni+CMfu5Lq2zU c=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.37,227,1488844800"; d="scan'208";a="413517362"
Received: from alln-core-5.cisco.com ([173.36.13.138]) by alln-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 20 Apr 2017 21:25:31 +0000
Received: from [10.41.56.234] ([10.41.56.234]) by alln-core-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v3KLPT0Q028005; Thu, 20 Apr 2017 21:25:30 GMT
To: John Scudder <jgs@juniper.net>
References: <D4E812E8-AA7B-4EA2-A0AC-034AA8922306@juniper.net> <abe393d3-d1e4-7841-4620-38dab751765b@cisco.com> <68B29403-9AD9-4F06-9FE4-3F077E793D9F@puck.nether.net> <275cf744-1f64-bcbc-dabe-a47479921230@cisco.com> <20170420154142.lacvtplusepy3qcf@hanna.meerval.net> <b57162ec-f806-6e86-7713-58608f72c468@cisco.com> <32C0B4EE-6241-49F9-97F2-7107AC68678D@juniper.net> <e513849d-f895-0499-7bf4-5ecb24cadab7@cisco.com> <4CE4AF1E-0C80-423E-B19D-5750FCAFAD89@juniper.net>
Cc: Job Snijders <job@ntt.net>, "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>, Hares Susan <shares@ndzh.com>, Enke Chen <enkechen@cisco.com>
From: Enke Chen <enkechen@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <11b08110-26e7-d67b-55f1-1f8cb777605e@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2017 14:25:29 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4CE4AF1E-0C80-423E-B19D-5750FCAFAD89@juniper.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/HPWEKJxUbNaIg08exAQhDcnf1RE>
Subject: Re: [Idr] IETF LC for IDR-ish document <draft-ietf-grow-bgp-reject-05.txt> (Default EBGP Route Propagation Behavior Without Policies) to Proposed Standard
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 20 Apr 2017 21:25:34 -0000

John,

On 4/20/17 2:12 PM, John Scudder wrote:
> (as an individual contributor)
> 
> On Apr 20, 2017, at 5:03 PM, Enke Chen <enkechen@cisco.com>; wrote:
>> It's not like the issues with software update are new :-)
> 
> Yes, exactly. That's why I'm so surprised by this discussion. 
> 
> What I still see here is
> 
> - on one hand, a worked example showing how an implementor could roll out the
>   functionality without causing heartburn for users. (My paraphrase: expose the
>   default in the configuration. When upgrading old->new, automatically create
>   the corresponding configuration line(s) to configure for legacy behavior.)

Change of software may involve both upgrade and downgrade and combination (e.g.,
when a serious issue is seen).

When the software is downgraded, the config may not be recognized and may be
lost.

-- Enke

> 
> - on the other hand, general statements about how this is a hard problem.
> 
> I find the specific worked example more convincing. 
> 
> --John
>