Re: [Idr] Robert Wilton's Discuss on draft-ietf-idr-eag-distribution-16: (with DISCUSS)

Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 19 May 2021 03:43 UTC

Return-Path: <jefftant.ietf@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 026EB3A1BC9; Tue, 18 May 2021 20:43:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 NXkZwEAS4gm7; Tue, 18 May 2021 20:43:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oo1-xc30.google.com (mail-oo1-xc30.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::c30]) (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 A6D473A1BC6; Tue, 18 May 2021 20:43:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oo1-xc30.google.com with SMTP id s1-20020a4ac1010000b02901cfd9170ce2so2701357oop.12; Tue, 18 May 2021 20:43:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version; bh=y7Co6j953eh0BN2XovAAJ0YPDKNnfTwyz0VBw8QZV9w=; b=R9c5gkuwm66GFsxY2k8iItjMXiOu31uhpe55pQ8YyK97TMQrjQiafgFkG3/5G9cLz3 pSqVc6jpRsH0jM2oAEsX+KNabla5aEmHatKes9LbJ39gZUXVBAptOj9O98KtOQ56SToi TLLo8VMmhLC3LvVmkP6AC2FJ26b6ET4zLDyICMjtrpJoOmtF+mAQ6LuS9qguU+mE3Kp6 EhlOFil27Zn2ds21IMjDFo0UIPzlPvle/mVJdtJQg9Az4XBRz79NwNEf9+gdTVc7izXp ME9Tu/22HNrqPNUHhZQ3OqV9QJ9dK4F1SLI/JeDHRxtijK6Rw2gMf+1iAzJUPnP6lORI G0Ow==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to :references:subject:mime-version; bh=y7Co6j953eh0BN2XovAAJ0YPDKNnfTwyz0VBw8QZV9w=; b=gL8y7g09hiIwiGyLFXkPjKGucWogIfn1Kprmdll8QtEO6DkVV8fyxqNqyKXBkQNQkZ wlG91pq+XPKlBHBMbXaqZUc7xTZyd6SWcXVCXPu54ZBuxVJQOUACl7HAYoIoU1umn3Ok qdGuBCMVsCXTpFcBRoHpoITKjeB6ZH8/4asWpFhgBcoq958uTTyFLFq7PVXkmpRx8YSG hxjdqJOi9s/WKVdd9QPGDyHSuh1+DoT+Hlvt1XIu9hK84+EESTNXo7AqqbUKJXozYHEt m/D4hPFtP6oYlq4hszSfMjfbLMQsQmCPEL26ehemjuGV9o/nGby0ucLS1ZEoWPixutzJ 39Zg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5334KgaDsGcaNxwZ7kWjPNl7R6gHBsYq5d+/sWRXCGRu6L4HZDcu HNRCsGan9b0kbfhwQAZJMw4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwIQsdPZD3Vs6tlajo4Z8jLGpiyE0qnqs/kVxGjs6Rjn+D1YT0lCkR40GKVrF7GcvxXPfTZAw==
X-Received: by 2002:a4a:625c:: with SMTP id y28mr6995453oog.45.1621395819993; Tue, 18 May 2021 20:43:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.10.7.234] ([200.56.195.98]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u27sm4166529oof.38.2021.05.18.20.43.38 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 18 May 2021 20:43:39 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 18 May 2021 22:43:23 -0500
From: Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>
To: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>, Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <rwilton@cisco.com>
Cc: "=?utf-8?Q?draft-ietf-idr-eag-distribution=40ietf.org?=" <draft-ietf-idr-eag-distribution@ietf.org>, "=?utf-8?Q?idr-chairs=40ietf.org?=" <idr-chairs@ietf.org>, Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>, "=?utf-8?Q?idr=40ietf.org?=" <idr@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <9781723c-c338-4c9e-bd48-4299bc71677f@Spark>
In-Reply-To: <MN2PR11MB4366D7867A07B5049620E2FAB52C9@MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: <2bfc125c57a1451b84dc296d67fbc24e@huawei.com> <MN2PR11MB4366C0E05256F1FE7009D26CB52C9@MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <CAMMESszPXBSNVoPGdQ+y4RR8OAt7xKTMX=GD2PsPXZj9ksJk=Q@mail.gmail.com> <MN2PR11MB4366D7867A07B5049620E2FAB52C9@MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
X-Readdle-Message-ID: 9781723c-c338-4c9e-bd48-4299bc71677f@Spark
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="60a48968_3855585c_b163"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/TE-2gmkB5HU0VNYcxikbLptoLHM>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Robert Wilton's Discuss on draft-ietf-idr-eag-distribution-16: (with DISCUSS)
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Wed, 19 May 2021 03:43:47 -0000

Hi Rob,

Thanks for your review!

It is specifically out of scoop of what BGP-LS consumer does with the data.
I’ll go ahead and update the text (both sentences) would that work for you?


Thanks!

Cheers,
Jeff
On May 18, 2021, 10:03 AM -0500, Rob Wilton (rwilton) <rwilton@cisco.com>om>, wrote:
> Hi Alvaro, Qin,
>
> Please see inline.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
> > Sent: 18 May 2021 15:51
> > To: Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>om>; The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>rg>; Rob Wilton
> > (rwilton) <rwilton@cisco.com>
> > Cc: draft-ietf-idr-eag-distribution@ietf.org; idr-chairs@ietf.org; Susan
> > Hares <shares@ndzh.com>om>; idr@ietf.org
> > Subject: RE: Robert Wilton's Discuss on draft-ietf-idr-eag-distribution-
> > 16: (with DISCUSS)
> >
> > On May 18, 2021 at 10:29:24 AM, Rob Wilton wrote:
> >
> >
> > Rob:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > Joining the threads...
> >
> >
> > ...
> > > Alternatively, having read the referenced text, having a sentence in the
> > > introduction that states that the BGP-LS EAP attribute is handled
> > entirely
> > > independently of the AG attribute would be sufficient. I.e., the text in
> > the
> > > introduction makes this seem like this is a replacement for, and in some
> > way
> > > related to, the EA attribute.
> >
> > Here's a suggestion...from the Introduction:
> >
> > OLD>
> >    These administrative groups are defined as a fixed-length 32-bit
> >    bitmask.  As networks grew and more use-cases were introduced, the
> >    32-bit length was found to be constraining and hence extended
> >    administrative groups (EAG) were introduced in [RFC7308].
> >
> >    This document specifies an extension to BGP-LS for advertisement of
> >    the extended administrative groups.
> >
> > NEW (append, or add as a new paragraph)>
> >    The EAG TLV (Section 2) is not a replacement for the Administrative
> >    Group (color) TLV; as explained in [RFC7308] both values can coexist.
> >    It is out of scope for this document to specify the behavior of the
> >    BGP-LS consumer [RFC7752].
> [RW]
> >
> >
> > Would that work?
> [RW]
> Broadly, yes. The first extra sentence would be sufficient to clear my initial confusion when I was reading this document.
>
> I don’t mind if you want to keep the second sentence, but it is a bit unclear to me as to what behaviour is out of scope.
>
> Thanks,
> Rob
>
>
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Alvaro.