IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] comment on draft-ietf-idr-bgp-extended-messages

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Thu, 08 June 2017 06:41 UTC

Return-Path: <rraszuk@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 149971243F6; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 23:41:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.4
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.4 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=1.989, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01] 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 q5ODpyNMR2tr; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 23:41:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io0-x22f.google.com (mail-io0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22f]) (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 2645E120726; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 23:41:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id k93so16237529ioi.2; Wed, 07 Jun 2017 23:41:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=MXr+E11Q//sKC0M17idQ2KdSwyADz/cgbTV+bldX2Cs=; b=uK75ww4CZvHJKthlCMDeZmrHhtfhbbhozM85Q2Dce4T4QEhLr+uWD6Jq+qmDIH0yqy JmbsdrOji46YXPdR49b0G8OhIZvg/LfmCnpb7+AZRVXWj2Y/UCvRAXqYzgtWRMiBFPct k+OjUf5eg8A+hHQpTjp9YQaUjlW/tEN82LGjQMhY++iIkHvUmxIC/3HTpqrd8GBbEXf/ 5Yf/L1TqHoekJcWoZj3mJ86xwTkzcZXGBMzY722O0ZVmcNEdZfFcLKOD2HXYZ56HcgS6 nEg0shsAZFAS2Uk1IKWoG5kK2gIt3qGPuSxqoH97vFBq8cOWQVt9c0VBdg2hmjngB3LY VZDg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=MXr+E11Q//sKC0M17idQ2KdSwyADz/cgbTV+bldX2Cs=; b=A6UXDQQp6o5P3Ka2jhj2z2o35rlkSp/O7WeNQSxbxep8zAsU0s5tElk9LANMaZxxvV 1pPx+HdfAJaBkUT5a8ctrzo6UsNA/aCV+dNNVCHUwy3e6fhvgBywMuogyofSLYB5NN3c kLcUkmPFn2FvMdv+9P1rRFzxbfmNGhi4Y8YouW1TtHWQrHCNbSNFv38fmet0f6Y4JdOy twUJvSGRIVtJWXx4jfqeXUToKEmjsMahgJb/jQudmgG01tnb21uvAaTGekd/qiuOQA09 jsd3U4QLdusMeW2tKHV695YoR5/8Nd+JLMSnXcTsBf4T4QuF2SxTgPlM5nIpRlRJZe62 CvJQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcDvCtvRqiP7RDIip1e7x3IcH7K7hGwjaMNDosK7Lz2P48ma2XUg PM6mheUixn+PK62Js7WAkau/7LqiDaTC
X-Received: by 10.107.165.148 with SMTP id o142mr35698235ioe.179.1496904072449; Wed, 07 Jun 2017 23:41:12 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: rraszuk@gmail.com
Received: by 10.79.0.226 with HTTP; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 23:41:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.79.0.226 with HTTP; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 23:41:11 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CA+b+ERmYh5sqFmRwkMDk5JJjxc=YopmRJ76Z6BSXwnZikv1oCQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <HK2PR0601MB1361016F598133FDC59C8E1DFCC90@HK2PR0601MB1361.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com> <CA+b+ERmYh5sqFmRwkMDk5JJjxc=YopmRJ76Z6BSXwnZikv1oCQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2017 08:41:11 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: NW2-JOvRQ5ETYfoXYFQSRkP0FJc
Message-ID: <CA+b+ERkVAFh0n24+dL4LNq2DJaubtW8oeNYg4iTJ1kqpsUQ57Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: li zhenqiang <li_zhenqiang@hotmail.com>
Cc: "draft-ietf-idr-bgp-extended-messages.all" <draft-ietf-idr-bgp-extended-messages.all@ietf.org>, idr wg <idr@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114928f48064ea05516d232c"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/W5vQ28A76s2rCqQQ6VHR0SVRKEI>
Subject: Re: [Idr] comment on draft-ietf-idr-bgp-extended-messages
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Thu, 08 Jun 2017 06:41:15 -0000

Hi,

Wouldn't TCP simply retransmit missing data if drops are accidental ?

If drops are "by design" due to as you said security rules I am afraid such
path is not going to carry BGP session.

//RR.




On Jun 8, 2017 07:26, "li zhenqiang" <li_zhenqiang@hotmail.com> wrote:

Hello,

This doc, https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-
extended-messages/
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__datatracker.ietf.org_doc_draft-2Dietf-2Didr-2Dbgp-2Dextended-2Dmessages_&d=DwMGaQ&c=IL_XqQWOjubgfqINi2jTzg&r=Xx9729xYDYoCgBDdcp1FKt5PyYd1TCoXNKhyPY8CFp8&m=plGpWzcW7ppWguHBC4w6PyEGZRLkmX7MJ1vUTVNOpZs&s=0pin7tGPbPq5n1iayUcdxrEXuvzvTPplWdQkXERikBo&e=>
, extends the maximum update message size of BGP beyond 4096 bytes to
65535 bytes.
My comment is about its transport. BGP is TCP based and TCP relys on IP to
do fragmentation and reassembly if needed. But IP fragmented packets  may
be droped by some nodes in the network due to security rules or to improve
the tansport preformance.  So sometimes the BGP speakers may not receive
some fragmented extended update messgaes. This deployment problem should be
considered.

Best Regards,
------------------------------
li_zhenqiang@hotmail.com

_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
Idr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email