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

[Minto Jeyananth <[e-mail]>]

As a co-author of draft-minto-idr-bgp-auto-discovery, I support WG adoption.
Easier to implement in any routing platform (Took couple of weeks to fully implement this).
All described mechanism/implementation is already exist one or other routing protocols.
Uses well deployed security model and no session overhead.

-minto

From: Idr <[e-mail]> on behalf of Susan Hares <[e-mail]>
Date: Tuesday, May 3, 2022 at 5:21 AM
To: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Subject: [Idr] Adoption call for BGP Auto-Configuration drafts (5/1 to 5/23/2022) - 3 weeks
[External Email. Be cautious of content]


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/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-acee-idr-lldp-peer-discovery/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GyFKzV3_YkC6DZEveSn1aEM2IypTPC7u3ZJAWadj99n2EKzYYcnvJN05kD2S91LEoOVbDM0SMwfc$>



- draft-ietf-lsvr-l3dl + draft-ietf-lsvr-l3dl-ulpc

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsvr-l3dl/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsvr-l3dl/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GyFKzV3_YkC6DZEveSn1aEM2IypTPC7u3ZJAWadj99n2EKzYYcnvJN05kD2S91LEoOVbDFCeIPLJ$>

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsvr-l3dl-ulpc/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsvr-l3dl-ulpc/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GyFKzV3_YkC6DZEveSn1aEM2IypTPC7u3ZJAWadj99n2EKzYYcnvJN05kD2S91LEoOVbDDFpiTHv$>

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsvr-l3dl-signing/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsvr-l3dl-signing/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GyFKzV3_YkC6DZEveSn1aEM2IypTPC7u3ZJAWadj99n2EKzYYcnvJN05kD2S91LEoOVbDKqvTEX2$>



- draft-minto-idr-bgp-auto-discovery

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-minto-idr-bgp-autodiscovery/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-minto-idr-bgp-autodiscovery/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GyFKzV3_YkC6DZEveSn1aEM2IypTPC7u3ZJAWadj99n2EKzYYcnvJN05kD2S91LEoOVbDO1e_7rk$>



- draft-ymbk-idr-l3dn + draft-ymbk-idr-l3dn-ulpc

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ymbk-idr-l3nd/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ymbk-idr-l3nd/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GyFKzV3_YkC6DZEveSn1aEM2IypTPC7u3ZJAWadj99n2EKzYYcnvJN05kD2S91LEoOVbDOQjIDYD$>

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ymbk-idr-l3nd-ulpc/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ymbk-idr-l3nd-ulpc/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GyFKzV3_YkC6DZEveSn1aEM2IypTPC7u3ZJAWadj99n2EKzYYcnvJN05kD2S91LEoOVbDDmckDGC$>



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.

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.

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.


Juniper Business Use Only


Juniper Business Use Only