Re: [Idr] WG adoption call for draft-hr-idr-rfc5575bis-02 "Dissemination of Flow Specification Rules"

Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@huawei.com> Mon, 06 February 2017 15:06 UTC

Return-Path: <linda.dunbar@huawei.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 5426C129E1E for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 07:06:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.961
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.961 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_OBFUSCATE_05_10=0.26, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 fonJgfzt8OZL for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 07:06:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 345E7129421 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 07:06:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml708-cah.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id DFX81724; Mon, 06 Feb 2017 15:06:03 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from SJCEML701-CHM.china.huawei.com (10.208.112.40) by lhreml708-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.202) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.301.0; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 15:06:01 +0000
Received: from SJCEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com ([169.254.4.133]) by SJCEML701-CHM.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.132]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 07:06:00 -0800
From: Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@huawei.com>
To: "zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn" <zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn>, "jgs@juniper.net" <jgs@juniper.net>
Thread-Topic: [Idr] WG adoption call for draft-hr-idr-rfc5575bis-02 "Dissemination of Flow Specification Rules"
Thread-Index: AQHSgFZebRk7H2o63kWVakGmNML5RaFcFE6g
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 15:05:59 +0000
Message-ID: <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F65923E00E@SJCEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com>
References: 36E285C0-C716-437A-806D-A453273146DD@juniper.net, 1D651738-BCED-4F25-88B5-5257871697DA@juniper.net <201702061651394752150@zte.com.cn>
In-Reply-To: <201702061651394752150@zte.com.cn>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.47.158.164]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F65923E00ESJCEML702CHMchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A090204.589890DC.0068, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.4.133, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 02f50d24253fb5940cb5358b8724cdb0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/LQrSjBD-_95vDzjzYtLAbHtNNvE>
Cc: "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Idr] WG adoption call for draft-hr-idr-rfc5575bis-02 "Dissemination of Flow Specification Rules"
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 06 Feb 2017 15:06:10 -0000

Support,



Linda Dunbar


原始邮件
发件人: <jgs@juniper.net>;
收件人: <idr@ietf.org>;
日 期 :2017年02月02日 00:41
主 题 :Re: [Idr] WG adoption call for draft-hr-idr-rfc5575bis-02 "Dissemination of Flow Specification Rules"


Hi All,

Reminder, this call for adoption is going on and will end in five days. So far, the only reply has been from Christoph (thanks!) with a pointer to his paper "BGP Flow Specification Multi Vendor and Inter AS Interoperability". The paper is long, but I encourage you to look at it. To encourage you, here are a few excerpts from the conclusion:

"we think that what we listed as bugs sometimes is a result of unclear sections and definitions in RFC 5575"

"With this update we think that a proper interoperable implementation should be possible and unambiguous sections have been improved"

and perhaps most motivational to the WG:

"Given the current bugs, interoperability issues and missing features we do not recommend flow specification BGP sessions between different carriers […] Invalid flow specification NLRIs or action filters have the potential to remotely trigger a complete network failure."

If you do NOT support adopting this work, it would be interesting to hear why. For example, do you think RFC 5575 is fine as it is, and if so, why (considering the issues raised in the paper and on the list). Of course, it is not IDR's job to document and fix implementation bugs. But it is *exactly* our job to fix the spec if it's ambiguous and that ambiguity leads to interoperability issues.

If you do support adopting the work, please remember to say so on the list — we can't declare consensus based on silence.

Thanks,

—John

> On Jan 21, 2017, at 10:03 AM, John G. Scudder <jgs@juniper.net> wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> The authors have requested IDR working group adoption of draft-hr-idr-rfc5575bis-02 "Dissemination of Flow Specification Rules". Please send your comments to the list.
>
> This adoption call will conclude on Monday, February 6.
>
> Thanks,
>
> —John
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> Idr@ietf.org<mailto:Idr@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr

_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
Idr@ietf.org<mailto:Idr@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr