Re: [Idr] 2 week WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-shutdown-02 (1/17 to 1/31/2017)

Jeffrey Haas <> Sat, 28 January 2017 01:57 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7948B129421; Fri, 27 Jan 2017 17:57:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.1
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.199, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1uvc-UNJ0sVE; Fri, 27 Jan 2017 17:57:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1019D12941E; Fri, 27 Jan 2017 17:57:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: by (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 6A2781E32C; Fri, 27 Jan 2017 21:02:05 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 21:02:05 -0500
From: Jeffrey Haas <>
To: Matthew Walster <>
Message-ID: <>
References: <01b801d27105$45702bc0$d0508340$> <> <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: <>
Cc:,, Susan Hares <>
Subject: Re: [Idr] 2 week WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-shutdown-02 (1/17 to 1/31/2017)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2017 01:57:11 -0000

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 03:21:19PM -0800, Matthew Walster wrote:
> On 27 January 2017 at 13:38, Jeffrey Haas <> wrote:
> > I believe the draft should cover both administrative sub-codes.
[...] Suggestions of other cases to expand the text-form of the notification
to other sub-codes.

> There is obvious scope-creep at this point, I would like to suggest either
> the draft considered as-is or to allow all Cease sub-codes to have shutdown
> communication possible.

I certainly hadn't intended to try to push for a more general widening of
the scope; just point out something under the existing use case.

While you give three other examples of places that could benefit from
additional data regarding why the session has been sent a CEASE, I don't
think all of them are equally clear with respect to that data being text.

As an example, the max prefixes might benefit from a simple tuple.  E.g.
AFI,SAFI,<limit>.  Although keeping this within even a light-weight TLV
would permit space for the machine-readable portion along with a human
readable one.

I would suggest in the absence of a strong case for text strings in the
other sub-codes that for now the draft stay restricted to the administrative
reset cases.  As this draft proves, if there's consenus to add additional
DATA to one of the code points, it can move fast.

-- Jeff