Re: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-ext-opt-param-06.txt - 2 Week WG LC (7/30 to 8/13/2019)

"Jakob Heitz (jheitz)" <jheitz@cisco.com> Fri, 09 August 2019 22:17 UTC

Return-Path: <jheitz@cisco.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 C22CE1200FA for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Aug 2019 15:17:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.501
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=H7ACfMCK; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=GV//1Ug0
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 poZq5QCibXen for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Aug 2019 15:17:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E22FA120077 for <idr@ietf.org>; Fri, 9 Aug 2019 15:17:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=7440; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1565389070; x=1566598670; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=MunTu+ffevmmdObJbRbNOMkMQgh8eWyfk0OTWEKQ+bI=; b=H7ACfMCKa/TvSXNpKeN6c0pEiwkpnQ+ZAj9BNisGVMXW9GV8Du86smzU dAVQSwSvO8kR0Gzx8h9CN/dLbEGQ/wKDSzu1LDsHv18RCGKAdHo86QjMG 0ljJGVWIgdGbmYWZN4JrHRptXVDwQEYWRyUB3/BFe/GcRJGRyGcxPVIQe s=;
IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3AvvLxEB3xYNT/qNA8smDT+zVfbzU7u7jyIg8e44?= =?us-ascii?q?YmjLQLaKm44pD+JxGOt+51ggrPWoPWo7JfhuzavrqoeFRI4I3J8RVgOIdJSw?= =?us-ascii?q?dDjMwXmwI6B8vQC032LeL4Ryc7B89FElRi+iLzPA=3D=3D?=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AMAADG8E1d/5hdJa1mGQEBAQEBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEBAQcBAQEBAQGBVAMBAQEBAQsBgUQkLANtVSAECxcThB6DRwOLD0yCD5d?= =?us-ascii?q?hgS4UgRADVAkBAQEMAQEYCwoCAQGEPwIXgkojNQgOAQQBAQQBAQQBCm2FJwy?= =?us-ascii?q?FSgEBAQECAQEBEBERDAEBLAwEBwQCAQgRBAEBAQICJgICAiULFQgIAQEEARI?= =?us-ascii?q?IEweDAYFqAw4PAQIMoFcCgTiIYHKBMoJ6AQEFhRgYghQDBoEMKAGLRh0XgUA?= =?us-ascii?q?/gRFGgkw+gQSBXQEBAgGBKwELAQYBIRWCdDKCJo8QnDkJAoIdhmKNaIRik1a?= =?us-ascii?q?EG4k2h16QIQIEAgQFAg4BAQWBUQE2Z3FwFTuCbIJCCRoVgzqFFIU/cgGBKIs?= =?us-ascii?q?UAQ4XgiwBAQ?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.64,366,1559520000"; d="scan'208";a="612263739"
Received: from rcdn-core-1.cisco.com ([173.37.93.152]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 09 Aug 2019 22:17:40 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-014.cisco.com (xch-rcd-014.cisco.com [173.37.102.24]) by rcdn-core-1.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x79MHeZ7025005 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 9 Aug 2019 22:17:40 GMT
Received: from xhs-rtp-001.cisco.com (64.101.210.228) by XCH-RCD-014.cisco.com (173.37.102.24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Fri, 9 Aug 2019 17:17:40 -0500
Received: from xhs-aln-003.cisco.com (173.37.135.120) by xhs-rtp-001.cisco.com (64.101.210.228) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Fri, 9 Aug 2019 18:17:38 -0400
Received: from NAM05-BY2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (173.37.151.57) by xhs-aln-003.cisco.com (173.37.135.120) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Fri, 9 Aug 2019 17:17:38 -0500
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=J+JP0BJr48aK6idIvK4GBq/diIWAZoTPLSyKk/q2SjaEM4PknU0sS5Zb3CKbUdiI3x2mKGnHpWwBeJBIYg+12pUcoCj5KNtss7z04OYHggiP8XawRnYWRwgQ50WqoPsvmT9OyIJXaWonQdHplT31j7OhFr2BRkkihHh4RVrpvh3TYCSVxDyWYadjr8qr8G+JFZRGix88SlTJn7/XWp7RGyY1D+KJpCTLavXP5eX4IIzsJ50b+ACMp8ITjWhRJVQiwxoTBvKrl8YQZukNObQ79gagblh47ScDnIgaMg9gbxbRGOymhP50Jzd/xAlmJDPLblN6iI7mYXoHLZh5VjoEwQ==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=MunTu+ffevmmdObJbRbNOMkMQgh8eWyfk0OTWEKQ+bI=; b=eLwsExomwcreQPlOfN2z8Tvlyr9f5Rm8c/3dP86jgYyvwAa27KO8wdSpRxmepT3YBmh+UMWWebmodJDlP6EH8kllWokMssNoxrafysfL0/U9FIs5PfXVpotlv7Fa+qNfnPuYo8YS+LW9f322V1LVmPzAm96QVHOUa2i7EauQa9DhwveMsm2sEx2V7Bj9h8mMdmV221Uoa72s7FXPdWBcg/Q9srAJDfZRmRuZzjWQlkuTWmN+2aMeO34cu5qJEnjHm9krrKu0mauVFOoMQuuFLDgr4P39YRLSyz+EFpjm3HbWLp4ggOJtyjB9M1GoMxp9wNhELJbqVIycbUEzHFnrbQ==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=MunTu+ffevmmdObJbRbNOMkMQgh8eWyfk0OTWEKQ+bI=; b=GV//1Ug0pwvDF/CROrFFSPH0YB/RQBqAwK4k/q6CLRvlFhhgO6QTtyteLC8JtcNl0eA7UWT0pwq+3TGA5jbnp7910NWGBLH4NWeXM9Kw3yjgmnm6rB0Y/gtEjApwlhxP/Jb9rRZ6mOBq57ybE1GJ6Lzfbshb7LJAQbCcHOtAh2s=
Received: from BYAPR11MB3751.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (20.178.238.144) by BYAPR11MB2680.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (52.135.227.146) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2157.18; Fri, 9 Aug 2019 22:17:34 +0000
Received: from BYAPR11MB3751.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::f19b:a29c:2227:69e4]) by BYAPR11MB3751.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::f19b:a29c:2227:69e4%5]) with mapi id 15.20.2157.015; Fri, 9 Aug 2019 22:17:34 +0000
From: "Jakob Heitz (jheitz)" <jheitz@cisco.com>
To: "Jakob Heitz (jheitz)" <jheitz@cisco.com>, John Scudder <jgs=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>, Ondrej Zajicek <santiago@crfreenet.org>, idr wg <idr@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-ext-opt-param-06.txt - 2 Week WG LC (7/30 to 8/13/2019)
Thread-Index: AdVG8AEgtJ8an9KITLaaaGetwJsC1QAAVhgAAcsDRwAAMe72gAAGKpgQAACTJQA=
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2019 22:17:34 +0000
Message-ID: <BYAPR11MB37516275BB126DD5CFDDE827C0D60@BYAPR11MB3751.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: <000801d546f0$b9d27310$2d775930$@ndzh.com> <1F967C41-2164-4FB7-813F-9DB41245BE6A@juniper.net> <20190808191346.GA20497@feanor.crfreenet.org> <9BB06D7E-860B-4864-86B6-85186DD74C5F@juniper.net> <BYAPR11MB37511B582BF868B9CA28B698C0D60@BYAPR11MB3751.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <BYAPR11MB37511B582BF868B9CA28B698C0D60@BYAPR11MB3751.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=jheitz@cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [2001:420:30d:1254:68ee:ac2e:9d42:aa6f]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 9ec760fe-aba1-4835-06c9-08d71d1760e9
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600148)(711020)(4605104)(1401327)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:BYAPR11MB2680;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BYAPR11MB2680:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 2
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BYAPR11MB26804F399808AC6DA1CC6814C0D60@BYAPR11MB2680.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:8882;
x-forefront-prvs: 01244308DF
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(346002)(39860400002)(396003)(136003)(376002)(366004)(189003)(199004)(13464003)(53936002)(14444005)(7736002)(55016002)(9686003)(305945005)(74316002)(6246003)(86362001)(6116002)(66946007)(2906002)(6306002)(8676002)(76116006)(5660300002)(66476007)(64756008)(229853002)(66446008)(66556008)(6436002)(52536014)(33656002)(99286004)(8936002)(186003)(81166006)(81156014)(14454004)(446003)(476003)(11346002)(2940100002)(46003)(486006)(110136005)(25786009)(71200400001)(7696005)(478600001)(71190400001)(966005)(76176011)(102836004)(6506007)(316002)(53546011)(256004); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:BYAPR11MB2680; H:BYAPR11MB3751.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 0CoQp8Lfm5dhCTUMM9tJTkjhZ3j+0BptMztDq++uff123xaf4CEc9OZRMgyGjAD/lIRqfgV7K+o3u+Ka+CYdNjL/P1SnIM8jXJKrDPSTp675dLCg/stYGUujswxy0dcJb0ns63Zvgxprq6M5GBKPvzpzPJRuxQpTpDkQsXh+ciRnKz+Y6fGZO95f2Poioe1xSmObKs9LFjE49sy3PMEeR9CyU/JHY8p9zrb7lfrP6JOjlZT3dkEe8dzA9ZGSr8SKbCl6PwtGzOHY8wQ380DduCorM8uFI+/uTguOqs1M9nskuEGAM5tcMpNePNrQxGadNZ8bw2e8fsDTDAWOME2W7+FCHSW2NjL1BjmpOXiFrEzIkbYyziZt5qJabYA3JrASuPNbB6sDByssRChHtkr+uJKy9kiwWgOJKE4CtA84PSU=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 9ec760fe-aba1-4835-06c9-08d71d1760e9
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 09 Aug 2019 22:17:34.1973 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: 60+H73n5AzkxmIcXOXKJCJCfk4fsfyuJV6Z5/gf6lQ21+CloRjjZlQPDUX9obwWqrEVAoeISWawkggmmybPx8w==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BYAPR11MB2680
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.24, xch-rcd-014.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-1.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/_7Gy8edFQF5Adk3MDvMGXbRdeFE>
Subject: Re: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-ext-opt-param-06.txt - 2 Week WG LC (7/30 to 8/13/2019)
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Fri, 09 Aug 2019 22:17:54 -0000

BTW, I support the draft. It is an elegant way to increase the available space for capabilities.

Regards,
Jakob.

-----Original Message-----
From: Idr <idr-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Jakob Heitz (jheitz)
Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 3:06 PM
To: John Scudder <jgs=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>rg>; Ondrej Zajicek <santiago@crfreenet.org>rg>; idr wg <idr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-ext-opt-param-06.txt - 2 Week WG LC (7/30 to 8/13/2019)

Huh???

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4271#section-4.2

       0                   1                   2                   3
       0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |    Version    |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |     My Autonomous System      |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |           Hold Time           |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                         BGP Identifier                        |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       | Opt Parm Len  |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                                                               |
       |             Optional Parameters (variable)                    |
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
...
      Optional Parameters Length:

         This 1-octet unsigned integer indicates the total length of the
         Optional Parameters field in octets.  If the value of this
         field is zero, no Optional Parameters are present.

      Optional Parameters:

         This field contains a list of optional parameters, in which
...

You may certainly include all capabilities in a single optional parameter
or each capability in its own optional parameter, but either way,
there is only one "Optional Parameters Length" field, so the total
length of all the optional parameters combined cannot exceed 255.

Can someone explain an alternative interpretation?

Regards,
Jakob.

-----Original Message-----
From: Idr <idr-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of John Scudder
Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 12:04 PM
To: Ondrej Zajicek <santiago@crfreenet.org>rg>; idr wg <idr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-ext-opt-param-06.txt - 2 Week WG LC (7/30 to 8/13/2019)

Wow. Color me embarrassed, and thank you for pointing this out. I think you are right, and furthermore I think it’s a better solution than what we describe in the draft.

Under the circumstances my suggestion to the WG is that we NOT advance the draft to Proposed Standard. The question would remain what to do with it, keeping in mind there are implementations in the wild. The options I can think of are to abandon it, or to publish it as Historic. So, options on the table for the WG are,

1. Abandon the draft.
2. Publish as Historic, because there are implementations out there.

I think in either of the above cases we would also move code 255 to “deprecated”.

3. Continue forward with the original plan of publishing as Proposed Standard, because ______ (fill in the blank if you support this option).

My preference is option 2, although I confess I might be biased by the sunk cost fallacy. :-/

Thanks again for your observation, Ondrej.

—John

> On Aug 8, 2019, at 3:13 PM, Ondrej Zajicek <santiago@crfreenet.org> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 04:10:49PM +0000, John Scudder wrote:
>> (As a co-author of course.)
>> 
>> Since it seemed helpful last time, here's the elevator pitch for
>> ext-opt-param: We are currently limited to 255 bytes of BGP capabilities.
>> Since many/most BGP extensions want to use a capability, it’s not hard to
>> imagine overrunning the 255 bytes.
> 
> AFAIK we are not currently limited to 255 bytes of BGP capabilities.
> 
> According to RFC 5492, multiple instances of capability options are
> allowed, well-defined, just discouraged:
> 
>   The Capabilities Optional Parameter (OPEN Optional Parameter Type 2)
>   SHOULD only be included in the OPEN message once. ... However,
>   for backward compatibility, a BGP speaker MUST be prepared to receive
>   an OPEN message that contains multiple Capabilities Optional
>   Parameters, each of which contains one or more capabilities TLVs.
> 
> If i want to announce 2k bytes of BGP capabilities, i can just split it
> to multiple sub-256 blocks of capability options. Real limits are 255 bytes
> for each capability and 4k bytes for whole OPEN message.
> 
> While the draft removes per-capability limit by allowing to put all
> capabilities ot one large option, it does that by backward-incompatible way,
> while splitting capabilities to multiple options is backward-compatible.
> 
> -- 
> Elen sila lumenn' omentielvo
> 
> Ondrej 'Santiago' Zajicek (email: santiago@crfreenet.org)
> OpenPGP encrypted e-mails preferred (KeyID 0x11DEADC3, wwwkeys.pgp.net)
> "To err is human -- to blame it on a computer is even more so."

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