Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-rtc-hierarchical-rr-04.txt

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Tue, 05 March 2024 09:54 UTC

Return-Path: <robert@raszuk.net>
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 E5240C14F69D for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Mar 2024 01:54:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.104
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.104 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=raszuk.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pE51yUKwRIgI for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Mar 2024 01:53:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ed1-x530.google.com (mail-ed1-x530.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::530]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BECD8C14F69F for <idr@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Mar 2024 01:53:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ed1-x530.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-563b7b3e3ecso8256692a12.0 for <idr@ietf.org>; Tue, 05 Mar 2024 01:53:56 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=raszuk.net; s=google; t=1709632435; x=1710237235; darn=ietf.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=AmamCwx0OvJw/LvNH6hfaMc5PoYe5iGLQT6vmqtlAMo=; b=e7QCJFzok0DD/i23JTdZ79+R8UnZBPHFh3lNofRU+H7b5znJiuacQMGAc1Y21knuiC vt8ZS6Z+pNxFR1Dk+BZ28/PrcOr1N/BfFmp3NefytYo6gzDOpNtOb/S0hAa4aKomoB/a JXMfZQDFYUskq3wZWvIkbqbRjN4BMyzRvULOiETujAMcBf4kLOkZMVnQYls24D8d5n9q lDE3AhUaSLr1ivCiEaAscVG3xaHuvsvuy/yfd4wO450p+LF0MfAkDZCJcMFUUjWPIAIw 6mxKHVu8A9ZnkiOK9jkQIU2VewvcIcabKjtIOZyCJNghqsgLgtlcXap5/4v59nk5SlHd QLgQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1709632435; x=1710237235; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=AmamCwx0OvJw/LvNH6hfaMc5PoYe5iGLQT6vmqtlAMo=; b=a2QDKDkQRsKU0dmPVaZgIInprbcVotyAAeUjIA0xv7dGwXK4E1ZuUA2t2h5/P4aByi MPgt/UsVXnjKfTgcLY165Ea6wVaFV4YOeqcoO16lyokbcr+Xlot+g8r/cFQgBZXkLKma C1CyqLiH8T6Rkzuhx5MnqK1KDOLs8eId/hs5gcsRZ04NsotwJTDDi2AC1zoLpVPuHGJs ojIwtBFQuhsX8U7QEYo6UR4Htm+cVNM6YYYK6cagic7sJdMf4Ff64YFonwiUIS7SV3tm 3pgwDnz2PFAobJN0sXj8BupuUd8z8zBQObTwz7jJrlwaDO2L1bqjMHA+9iPQOGwEzV2W CvoA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yx8eLRZXblqv1X2fr67Kj7AU7dMuJThcPQ76l56Tq8K8kAWCwH2 Hj4CZWDXm7q6RgvSPfgY5Am5h5wTHXa1zDW6CsbCL9V9QnFHn0Dfw90N0TvZVCailu4SRbrGNl1 EUgkN8FIAxWlkDz08y0gIqHmHeEv9XuJiiy9OIA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGcXs7/hpB7iwBFaScjU9FmXDTpE1jZVijLqL2Wk0adC82SI6YScsqgPs5zYJHUCvhKD8+TJtZoaw8kbYWmJKI=
X-Received: by 2002:a50:c88b:0:b0:564:f6d5:f291 with SMTP id d11-20020a50c88b000000b00564f6d5f291mr6814133edh.34.1709632434795; Tue, 05 Mar 2024 01:53:54 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <170954803408.43395.8450424120941872596@ietfa.amsl.com> <60B94E98-3D0E-44CF-8521-96A0F217AFDA@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <60B94E98-3D0E-44CF-8521-96A0F217AFDA@gmail.com>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2024 10:53:44 +0100
Message-ID: <CAOj+MMH7PrQGaZ__-ZGnEmvkZWT38xuaP+fhraUtJ4C=iK=Thw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alexander Okonnikov <alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com>
Cc: IDR List <idr@ietf.org>, i-d-announce@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f9101e0612e6d16d"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/SCmZ2r8XZ_KlOs-bnLnadh4hc0Q>
Subject: Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-rtc-hierarchical-rr-04.txt
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Tue, 05 Mar 2024 09:54:01 -0000

Alex,

The draft applies to reflected IBGP routes.

Best external draft you are quoting - which is extremely useful and
deployed proposal - is applicable to ASBRs/PEs learning BGP routes over
EBGP.

Thx,
R.



On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 10:45 AM Alexander Okonnikov <
alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi authors,
>
> We have already more generic alternative for the second solution - 'Best
> external route' described in
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-best-external-05.
> What about choosing one of two solutions - I lean towards 'best external'
> based solution. It seems lightweight and doesn't require Add-paths support.
>
> Thanks.
>
> BR
> Alexander Okonnikov
>
> 4 марта 2024 г., в 13:27, internet-drafts@ietf.org написал(а):
>
> Internet-Draft draft-ietf-idr-rtc-hierarchical-rr-04.txt is now available.
> It
> is a work item of the Inter-Domain Routing (IDR) WG of the IETF.
>
>   Title:   Extensions to RT-Constrain in Hierarchical Route Reflection
> Scenarios
>   Authors: Jie Dong
>            Mach(Guoyi) Chen
>            Robert Raszuk
>   Name:    draft-ietf-idr-rtc-hierarchical-rr-04.txt
>   Pages:   6
>   Dates:   2024-03-04
>
> Abstract:
>
>   The Route Target (RT) Constrain mechanism specified in RFC 4684 is
>   used to build a route distribution graph in order to restrict the
>   propagation of Virtual Private Network (VPN) routes.  In network
>   scenarios where hierarchical route reflection (RR) is used, the
>   existing RT-Constrain mechanism cannot guarantee a correct route
>   distribution graph.  This document describes the problem scenario and
>   proposes a solution to address the RT-Constrain issue in hierarchical
>   RR scenarios.
>
> The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-rtc-hierarchical-rr/
>
> There is also an HTMLized version available at:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-rtc-hierarchical-rr-04
>
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>
> https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-idr-rtc-hierarchical-rr-04
>
> Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at:
> rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> Idr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> Idr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>