Re: [Idr] WG adoption call for draft-abraitis-bgp-version-capability-08, to end September 25

Jeffrey Haas <> Wed, 28 October 2020 21:38 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 905553A09C4 for <>; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 14:38:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Bp0_KWLIkLcm for <>; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 14:38:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0899E3A09C3 for <>; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 14:38:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 3293A1E351; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 17:53:14 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 17:53:14 -0400
From: Jeffrey Haas <>
To: John Scudder <>
Cc: IDR List <>, Donatas Abraitis <>
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Idr] WG adoption call for draft-abraitis-bgp-version-capability-08, to end September 25
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 21:38:05 -0000

Adding in a comment as I clear my backlog:

On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 06:18:21PM +0000, John Scudder wrote:
> It seems to me that the discussion hasn’t concluded and we are still having productive discussion. Hence, I would like to extend the period for discussion by another week, now to conclude on October 2.

I have general concerns about this feature.  But let me offer related
observations why my opinion is "not a fan, but of potential use":

- This capability is advertised prior to session establishment.  
  RFC 8203 got a bit of jutification for putting in text during a
  NOTIFICATION where the session is going down anyway.  Having this at
  session start means less chance for damange than if we're exchanging stuff a
  bit more interactively in something like the operational message.
- I think requiring extended optional params is a good idea for this.  It
  mitigates the necessity for having to do do the math to squeeze stuff in
  or not.

I would qualify the feature as "mostly harmless" and "useful in some
circumstancs".  Use in BGP fabrics is one I find a compelling use case.

I'm strongly supportive of the concerns with using this feature for general
ISP eBGP use cases.  I will, however, offer the related observation that an
ISP may like knowing what version of software their customers are running.
It may ease situations where service providers may want to signal a customer
to upgrade a vulnerable stack.

Consider me weakly supportive of adoption and fast WGLC.

-- Jeff