Re: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-as0-00 ?

[Warren Kumari <[e-mail]>]

On Dec 1, 2011, at 5:18 PM, Enke Chen wrote:

> Warren:
> 
> I do not agree with the new text in the draft:
> 
> ----
>    This document specifies that a BGP speaker MUST NOT originate or
>    propagate a route with an AS number of zero.  If a BGP speaker
>    receives a route which has an AS number of zero in the AS_PATH (or
>    AS4_PATH) attribute, it SHOULD be logged and treated as a WITHDRAW.
>    This same behavior applies to routes containing zero as the
>    Aggregator or AS4 Aggregator.
> 
> -----
> 
> The presence of AS 0 is considered as an error.  The handling of the error condition should be specific to that attribute.  That is:
> 
>    o For the AS4_PATH and AS4_AGGREGATOR, the action is "attribute discard" as specified in the rfc4893bis.
> 
>    o For the AGGREGATOR, the action is also "attribute discard" as specified in draft-ietf-idr-error-handling-00.txt
> 
> 
> I still think and continue to recommend that you merely describe that AS 0 is an error condition in the draft, and let the error handling draft do the rest, as I suggested before:
> 
>    An UPDATE message that contains the AS number of zero in the AS-PATH attribute
>    MUST be considered as malformed, and be handled by the procedures specified in
>    draft-ietf-idr-optional-transitive-04.txt

Sure -- I was trying to avoid having this draft gate on publication of the idr-optional-transitive draft, but (of course) am happy to do whatever the WG wants (hint to WG: please let me know what you want :-P)

W

> 
> 
> -- Enke




> On 12/1/11 1:50 PM, Warren Kumari wrote:
>> [ Changed subject to reflect new title ]
>> 
>> 
>> On Dec 1, 2011, at 3:38 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Warren Kumari <[e-mail]>
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Nov 13, 2011, at 8:30 PM, Enke Chen wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> Support, but with the following suggestions:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 1) Nit: change "bgp listener" to "bgp speaker".
>>>>> 
>>>> Thank you, done.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 2) The following language is not very precise.  Due to the incremental nature, we will need to remove the existing route too.
>>>>> 
>>>>> -----
>>>>>    a BGP
>>>>>    listener MUST NOT accept an announcement which has an AS number of
>>>>>    zero in the AS-PATH attribute, and SHOULD log the fact that it has
>>>>>    done so.
>>>>> -----
>>>>> 
>>>>>    How about the following:
>>>>> 
>>>>>    An UPDATE message that contains the AS number of zero in the AS-PATH attribute
>>>>>    MUST be considered as malformed, and be handled by the procedures specified in
>>>>> 
>>>>> draft-ietf-idr-optional-transitive-04.txt
>>>>> 
>>>>> 3) If this draft is adopted, we should also add AS 0 as one of the error conditions in
>>>>> rfc4893bis.
>>>>> 
>>>> John also provided some text for that section and Keyur suggested that we log and treat as a WITHDRAW.
>>>> 
>>>> This would read as:
>>>> "This document specifies that a BGP speaker MUST NOT originate or propagate a route with an AS number of zero.  If a BGP speaker receives a route which has an AS number of zero in the AS_PATH attribute, it SHOULD be logged and treated as a WITHDRAW."
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> a question came up recently (today) on nanog about how AS0 should be
>>> treated wrt AGGREGATOR attributes... Should this say use of AS0
>>> anywhere (make a list perhaps?) is verboten? (or was that assumed
>>> already?)
>>> 
>> Actually Keyur Patel already pointed out the Aggregator (and AS4 Aggregator) attribute issue, and I included text in the WG version of the doc, which I posted recently (although I have just realized that I entered the text as "Aggregator" and not "AGGREGATOR", same for AS4...)
>> 
>> Which reminds me -- would folk please review draft-ietf-idr-as0-00 ( 
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-idr-as0-00
>>  ) and provide feedback?
>> I *think* that I incorporated everyones comments, although I accidentally overwrote the changed version with an older version (never edit a file in two editors at once :-)) and so may have missed some...
>> 
>> W
>> 
>> 
>>>> This avoids having a normative reverence to the optional-transitive draft and is (IMO) a little clearer. It also saves optional-transitive from referencing this, and so we avoid the deadlock...
>>>> 
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>> 
>>>> W
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks.   -- Enke
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 10/28/11 1:51 PM, John Scudder wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Folks,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Please send comments to the list prior to the IDR meeting on November 15.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --John
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Oct 27, 2011, at 9:29 AM, Warren Kumari wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hello IDRites,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I would like to draw your attention to draft-wkumari-idr-as0-01.txt  (
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wkumari-idr-as0-01
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>  ) - I am asking that this draft be considered for WG adoption.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I have already received some feedback, mainly suggesting:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> - Add a text for AS number 0 as a reserved in Aggregator and AS4
>>>>>>> Aggregator attribute
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> - Add text for AS number 0 as a reserved value in communities and
>>>>>>> extended communities. (RFC 1997 and Four-octet AS Specific Extended
>>>>>>> Communities)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Also suggested was providing a little more information on what to do it you do receive a route containing AS0  (more descriptive than just "MUST NOT accept" (for example, stating that it should be "excluded from the Phase 2 decision function")).
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Anyway, I would value your feedback and input.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> W
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Idr mailing list
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Idr mailing list
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Idr mailing list
>>>>> 
>>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Idr mailing list
>>>> 
>>>> [e-mail]
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>