Re: [Idr] Adoption call for BGP Auto-Configuration drafts (5/1 to 5/23/2022)

Hi Susan

Sorry for the late response.

I support adoption of the following  auto discovery drafts:

LLDP based Auto discovery

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-acee-idr-lldp-peer-discovery-11

This is a simple solution and does not require a session layer.

LLDP is supported by almost every vendor and so makes the discovery
mechanism easy to implement.

L3 UDP Multicast PDU discovery

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-minto-idr-bgp-autodiscovery-01

Simple L3 multicast discovery solution and does not require session layer.

L3DL-ULPC

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-lsvr-l3dl-ulpc-03

Simple L3 discovery and liveliness

Regards

Gyan

On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 5:18 AM Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com> wrote:

> Greetings:
>
>
>
> This WG adoption call for BGP auto-configuration drafts for the data
> center has gone for 3 weeks (5/1 to 5/23).
>
> This is the last day for responses.   Please consider responding.
>
>
>
> One clarification is needed to my call.  Our work on BGP
> auto-configuration has been focused on work for the data center.
>
>
>
> We will be picking up non-data center work BGP auto-configuration in late
> June.
>
>
>
> Cheers, Sue
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Idr <idr-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Susan Hares <
> shares@ndzh.com>
> *Date: *Tuesday, May 3, 2022 at 8:22 AM
> *To: *IDR List <idr@ietf.org>
> *Subject: *[Idr] Adoption call for BGP Auto-Configuration drafts (5/1 to
> 5/23/2022) - 3 weeks
>
>
>
> IDR Working Group,
>
>
>
> BGP auto-configuration has four proposals for consideration for adoption by
>
> the IDR Working Group:
>
>
>
> - draft-acee-idr-lldp-peer-discovery
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-acee-idr-lldp-peer-discovery/
>
>
>
> - draft-ietf-lsvr-l3dl + draft-ietf-lsvr-l3dl-ulpc
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsvr-l3dl/
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsvr-l3dl-ulpc/
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsvr-l3dl-signing/
>
>
>
> - draft-minto-idr-bgp-auto-discovery
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-minto-idr-bgp-autodiscovery/
>
>
>
> - draft-ymbk-idr-l3dn + draft-ymbk-idr-l3dn-ulpc
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ymbk-idr-l3nd/
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ymbk-idr-l3nd-ulpc/
>
>
>
>
>
> These proposals address the core issue of BGP auto-configuration in
>
> different ways:
>
> - What security model should we require?
>
> - What OSI layer? (Layer 2, Layer 3)
>
> - Does it provide a session layer?
>
>
>
> A brief summary of these properties for each proposal under consideration
>
> for adoption:
>
>
>
> draft-acee-idr-lldp-peer-discovery:
>
> - Operates at Layer 2 as an extension to the LLDP protocol.
>
> - Security optional, provided by MACSEC.
>
> - Does not provide (or require) a session layer.
>
>
>
>
>
> As a co-author, I support WG adoption. It is a quite light-weight approach
> to BGP discovery and most routing platforms already support LLDP. While no
> one has implemented the complete draft, BGP LLDP variations have already
> been implemented by some vendors.
>
>
>
> I don’t know of any IPR on the draft.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> draft-ietf-lsvr-l3dl + draft-ietf-lsvr-l3dl-ulpc:
>
> - Operates at Layer 2.
>
> - Security varies from optional to certificate based.
>
> - Provides its own session layer as part of the protocol.
>
>
>
> I don’t feel that adoption of BGP LLDP discovery would preclude adoption
> of this discovery protocol. However, I don’t have a strong opinion or
> whether it should run over its own session layer or TCP.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Acee
>
>
>
> draft-minto-idr-bgp-auto-discovery
>
> - Operates at Layer 3 link-local multicast.
>
> - Shared key authentication.
>
> - Does not provide (or require) a session layer.
>
>
>
> draft-ymbk-idr-l3dn + draft-ymbk-idr-l3dn-ulpc
>
> - Operates at Layer 3 with a link-local multicast component, and a unicast
>
>  component.
>
> - Security varies from optional to using certificate based with TLS.
>
> - Uses TCP for session layer for its unicast component.
>
>
>
> What protocol or protocols should be adopted by the Working Group for
>
> BGP auto-configuration?
>
>
>
> -----
>
> FYI - Jeff Tantsura will be judging the consensus for this adoption call.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> Idr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>
-- 

<http://www.verizon.com/>

*Gyan Mishra*

*Network Solutions A**rchitect *

*Email gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com <gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com>*

*M 301 502-1347*

Re: [Idr] Adoption call for BGP Auto-Configuration drafts (5/1 to 5/23/2022) - 3 weeks