IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] WG adoption of draft-heitz-idr-large-community; one week to comment on early code point allocation

Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org> Mon, 26 September 2016 23:32 UTC

Return-Path: <jhaas@pfrc.org>
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 69DA312B05C for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 16:32:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.218
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.218 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.316, SPF_HELO_PASS=-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 jEaGcP2_R951 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 16:31:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from slice.pfrc.org (slice.pfrc.org [67.207.130.108]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 255C912B049 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 16:31:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dresden.attlocal.net (99-59-193-67.lightspeed.livnmi.sbcglobal.net [99.59.193.67]) by slice.pfrc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 29D081E1DA; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 19:33:32 -0400 (EDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\))
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAH1iCip0=uYNieQmu=EMRNkGJTSLkhT_WjMj_4m0g+XApBEfkw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 19:31:57 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <C8FC1795-5A6B-4994-AB35-8C8F82127F7D@pfrc.org>
References: <43B423F6-E214-402D-BB29-99C062C46363@juniper.net> <20160924092657.GE1603@Vurt.local> <CAH1iCiobhRP=LqexAoi8LOVMN-O474EFHJTUTaRgxghxEi4aRw@mail.gmail.com> <20160926211852.GL3036@Hanna.local> <CAH1iCip0=uYNieQmu=EMRNkGJTSLkhT_WjMj_4m0g+XApBEfkw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brian Dickson <brian.peter.dickson@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/SR6VGPBcuMDBBlXP14BM6m7-Klg>
Cc: In-Depth Review <idr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Idr] WG adoption of draft-heitz-idr-large-community; one week to comment on early code point allocation
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, 26 Sep 2016 23:32:00 -0000

> On Sep 26, 2016, at 7:23 PM, Brian Dickson <brian.peter.dickson@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> RFC 1997 does not specifically say so, but definitely derives its "special" from the ASN registry "special" for 0 and 65535.

Given the practice of encoding an AS number in the first portion of the community, reserving 0 made some amount of sense.

There also tends to be common practice to try to reserve 0 out of things resembling code points to have as the "uninitialized value".  I'd recommend that practice continue for pretty much everything, including large comms.

> I think parity with 1997 would be the best course of action, and to include-by-reference 32-bit values that are 16 bits of 0, followed by 16 bits of 1997 values that are reserved, as well as the RFC 7300 32-bit Reserved ASN.
> I.e. 0:xxxx:yyyy, 65535:xxxx:yyyy, and 4294967295:xxxx:yyyy.

FWIW, I think things with "well known" semantics should stick to the reserved code point space in 1997 communities unless there's some motivation to have a common parameter/argument in it.  In that case, it fits the case for large comms anyway.

-- Jeff

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email