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

Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com> Mon, 24 April 2017 18:59 UTC

Return-Path: <christopher.morrow@gmail.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 D8B4712946C for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 11:59:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 olCTslmSzt0d for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 11:59:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt0-x22c.google.com (mail-qt0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::22c]) (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 52F67127342 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 11:59:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id c45so121975056qtb.1 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 11:59:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=zah7CKV3ZvUkfkvtKqHo509MyLwn9ph77mKK6KViZ7w=; b=vWKYVPY7A4OxncVSxsLN63J1c/I5w6ZGsOxum7oYz3aUJ5X5CSHGk9kTPslT1v4Uw8 eyrsEKkE+Mt9Dz7pDfWXRRmnP8SMdRBM+raYK/3b2sqDOVu/C0w974Cd9CVPTPIKu8xR G1qBWwqgv43VoG2NaiqAEzScZ7sUMhZqenCZEaSvadP/ReSbfPYc0IPmH3o8FfuhSK+E 1x/JiaIf0saDK0Ru/Elr6RNA75LjLnrmQ4/SRZgtxOFY9e039rNVtRVuilFNK8n4+8tD k0NSBy1OAvb9NnwZ5uA7XE6lMSFMBoOxTMqCLkXh9pXDmzBVCSafKI5igdxUVIdsnswT dFQg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=zah7CKV3ZvUkfkvtKqHo509MyLwn9ph77mKK6KViZ7w=; b=LDWY7i3Z835ndBHPOm/KsSUP8Bsj5PoJjgM1f5q9XTC/U7N8KGExUn+vnBmI4kFuP4 a9mmrmx9k4CECVagJk4oLFsmQn5A8xlP5QKU6VtJ8EwuHkcmNjL1nJZjk4d5V6T+OKwR 4M8yO/YVXmgzTEVkf7kt2yTGvx1VLkWh/yGZLpprzK6zfGz7o1a2g6PClmRCGulC9ZoI YBbzio4PLeuouVTuyMJBToOqrxoEhOf8oEomsG/T/Gj/Amm/TE0tYCJlXlCExYP6ZV8C VkiYYWB5jshY22Az2Dtkiws4q78c7roSLpZIvGb0QHsTXoPL3l8+9yD2QZvB1vG/RR1M HNjA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/68KxqN0AWw3G2/PyIwOeVgVAq4EY1/EP4Ydtcrbc09QPj6yGi2 2G+xqMU14yjPRojCKbf4jmUTgv3h/Q==
X-Received: by 10.200.48.14 with SMTP id f14mr27417905qte.201.1493060339520; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 11:58:59 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: christopher.morrow@gmail.com
Received: by 10.140.93.5 with HTTP; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 11:58:58 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <D51D6AD2.A9795%acee@cisco.com>
References: <D4E812E8-AA7B-4EA2-A0AC-034AA8922306@juniper.net> <abe393d3-d1e4-7841-4620-38dab751765b@cisco.com> <CA+b+ERnRz8BEO3mb1fnsDPoiL6Wxjdfw9vQPbyODNEa+xCJdnw@mail.gmail.com> <D51D67E4.A9782%acee@cisco.com> <AF07526F-F08B-4084-937B-A9A2D2DD2813@juniper.net> <D51D6AD2.A9795%acee@cisco.com>
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 14:58:58 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: G2-GoxgpWpGvUaiBBp4TnyDNOlk
Message-ID: <CAL9jLaa1UQ5A1FwRKVw5RJCBQO+0j0BW4vUNaPXHB0_JB0j76Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
Cc: John Scudder <jgs@juniper.net>, idr wg <idr@ietf.org>, Hares Susan <shares@ndzh.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1149c5f22a6216054dee33c2
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/KLkgpNNmMgbQ8ymGKiyX2tQZ-xk>
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: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 18:59:02 -0000

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 7:30 PM, Acee Lindem (acee) <acee@cisco.com>; wrote:

>
>
> On 4/19/17, 7:25 PM, "John Scudder" <jgs@juniper.net>; wrote:
>
> >(As an individual contributor)
> >
> >On Apr 19, 2017, at 7:18 PM, Acee Lindem (acee) <acee@cisco.com>; wrote:
> >> the draft is conspicuously missing a “Backwards Compatibility” section.
> >
> >Seriously? "Backwards compatibility" in this case is "configure your
> >router to do what it used to", right? We need a section to say that?
>
> Anytime one proposes to change the default behavior of a decades old
> protocol to be more restrictive, I would expect this to be discussed.
>

a few times in this discussion people say: "the protocol", but the draft
doesn't propose changing the protocol, it proposes that implementations
stop being wide-open with respect to send/receive conditioning/filtering.

There's no default behavior change in the protocol (which I think doesn't
really talk about filtering prefixes at all, not in the sense of
'prefix-list foo in' anyway).