[Idr] Re: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-as-set-confed-set-17

Ines Robles <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com> Tue, 18 February 2025 15:19 UTC

Return-Path: <mariainesrobles@googlemail.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 3E88CC1E7233; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 07:19:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.106 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=googlemail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LSrECcYgc4sL; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 07:19:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pj1-x1036.google.com (mail-pj1-x1036.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1036]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9C02C1E722D; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 07:19:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pj1-x1036.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2fbfc9ff0b9so8538833a91.2; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 07:19:20 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20230601; t=1739891960; x=1740496760; darn=ietf.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=invcTTudt7K3H9Yjz+Ks6vRVlwH94KMOC7EKC29DZmI=; b=eN1EHgqzL/j7Gh/r3PdOG3Xe75POWIkZwhjo43ccoOdba0jH3ntoLvyU4EkISPoyWH dcalsmyIHjeKHEmxZA2U3iHZx3D+oux1ZYOTEnxCgGY63CHKscBtZTMRv43wQaDiplzQ tsKTUeW/+5R6h8KixQ+BuhHi+4BfmjAI4+2zKpCXpfkvMh34Lf4n43/RJ05yCvjM8uBj QqSAaDvrCMzb8XNUCnkWpOlTuSjsSNBlSvj8uRrM3Vlsfs2qF48FUKsTVMFZhFvzAhfA lgOMROf/Dkjfoe5PjMbGgzMqb8opdyysFvfLbbXQmNeDp5iVQ/A/lIA/Re20u04OFspF DVkQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1739891960; x=1740496760; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=invcTTudt7K3H9Yjz+Ks6vRVlwH94KMOC7EKC29DZmI=; b=O3NSY/IRktTNtRprUFArkvzlzIWIWvulMei6AgEoWfjF08e8p2ygLQ4h9/X50So5fH Znl6jscJIq0Yc7sVPE6HIxemMfSrbzI53SqfgdJgx69GFcvJ5OQOGk/iBknYXeOvllnK gjXULdu04F4ayAm4LUfjec0wWOkjpkyL45WN8+MqNTTHm12QRXmXTe5qMyVKuGy6xo+m JZzldMFddd09e1t1tvEQtyzFgPpRKO8PMURugdMWoz9jno4qpvAUmsJ3QhraN6kP5edI yHXRdOQOMbu4EqjA2OVhqw/LNQvNYuABkRAC3NR+XSEemrV1ut+CtMQshVXL6S2ZWWnk TRvQ==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUKq1WvfRehUKQr70qUvheWgSeJ8QJlB+o99lWluKkEGXyUwu4pNix6nsULLfKK+Zw/Vswh+r1/hKWP@ietf.org, AJvYcCWcuTq3dr0QhH3lNNa98XLggePJVyAmA7x3FXIv2mMflPlZwYROY1+fCR0ijnCPCvvpeKk/ypOmYA==@ietf.org, AJvYcCX6fyHRbfwSklEW4snFKTf97fvxq+lBIn4xKyTzGq9zn2oZr4WJCePsAn+XkVPAC6wpvxWH2IBv0HjEGXjs0NG4G+VogpaBENYV0Y8YR3rhLC4XMxREC33/hF7eYtVM@ietf.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzHZTPLw5nXb3bf1PmQTYQHg0M/FoGTcxF9mLiQq79L6Xm9Zb8H 22iceU8DTi3IbJES3SPcd8D44Dn8wHCy2z3HjsCM0FGPfwm6AFHtOnLUTwKcqU7Or+5fA/037K2 ffde1Y5r8jxtaEvz2wQ9SOD/G2+QuFmQdeAE=
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncslMGK0NYpD8AP3dH7WtCKLJL43PqgfbiPPbWDlC8ufdyLI0+mnORoAvUK/86B fhW8iEBxm7dKz1fPu/0JIjmVNul0Uryw7KV3owCSGpE6EhxY/8//yIPrbOWw/hZEWor5I3w4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFEpA+JQ0f4aM5MNBBHqB7rsgLqSZfyot1P2vQfWoLp8cNupKFg5QGFKGMwq9cXiQRK4Mb0F5UCpJdQH9Np4rM=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:1b46:b0:2f8:4a3f:dd2d with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2fc40f22bf0mr22043584a91.15.1739891959731; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 07:19:19 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <173982341920.1423200.820968593830696495@dt-datatracker-75c44cbbdf-pxnd6> <f3af3abc-828b-4712-b021-9aefb4f4563a@pfrc.org> <DBBB8057-8DFA-4476-91D3-9DF768DEDF88@pfrc.org>
In-Reply-To: <DBBB8057-8DFA-4476-91D3-9DF768DEDF88@pfrc.org>
From: Ines Robles <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 17:18:42 +0200
X-Gm-Features: AWEUYZmoUi1f3WUX5m6_j8_GIQZjzqk8up7CGqAucdR_xkkIDQihQd-bL1QGDhM
Message-ID: <CAP+sJUeCDApzroG3w_sk5eF83L1qyqMtSm5tEutM36oMyhk=ow@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000003522c7062e6c2aad"
Message-ID-Hash: VXIMJXXZ76DVP3WSWYFIZKJBP6OMHIDG
X-Message-ID-Hash: VXIMJXXZ76DVP3WSWYFIZKJBP6OMHIDG
X-MailFrom: mariainesrobles@googlemail.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-idr.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: idr wg <idr@ietf.org>, gen-art@ietf.org, draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-as-set-confed-set.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [Idr] Re: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-as-set-confed-set-17
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/ZjVFWg5JjTysfJJCpHKUcHjQmFQ>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:idr-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:idr-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:idr-leave@ietf.org>

Ok, thank you, Jeffrey, for addressing my comments.

Best regards,

Ines

On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 4:02 PM Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org> wrote:

> My reply only had gone out to IDR, copying everyone else and catching some
> missing text:
>
>
> On Feb 17, 2025, at 4:26 PM, Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org> wrote:
>
> Ines,
>
> Thanks for your review.
> On 2/17/25 15:16, Ines Robles via Datatracker wrote:
>
> The document is well written, and I have some questions:
>
> 1- Consistent Brief Aggregation: What operational considerations or guidelines
> do you suggest for selecting the designated origin AS in environments where
> multiple candidate origins exist, such as in multi-homed or proxy aggregation
> scenarios?
>
> It's difficult to offer strong advice here, because "that depends".
> Fundamentally what we're interested in is that the operator chooses
> something that will make sense for their environment.  The most likely
> scenario will be that the aggregating party is also the holder of the
> address space for the aggregate.  In such cases their own AS will likely be
> the origin AS and they will discard the contributing AS_PATHs and originate
> the aggregate using their own AS.
>
> For the other cases?  It'll depend. The most likely case for including a
> contributing downstream AS will be when the address space has been
> partitioned and the proxy aggregation will be for a more specific network.
>
> An example could be provided, but the worry is that suggestions are read
> overly strong as normative implementation advice.
>
> 2- In cases where consistent brief aggregation results in an empty AS_PATH, is
> attaching the ATOMIC_AGGREGATE attribute sufficient to handle the resulting
> loss of AS_PATH information? Or should operators implement additional measures
> to ensure proper route validation and loop prevention?
>
>
> ATOMIC_AGGREGATE is effectively vestigial. No one automatically
> deaggregates.
>
> -- Jeff
>
> Jeff
>
>
>