Re: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model
"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Thu, 12 December 2019 22:33 UTC
Return-Path: <acee@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 D19FE1200A4; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 14:33:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.5 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, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=UOhwWYvN; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=w8iyMbSe
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 yTSeqkdxlD_Z; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 14:33:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 750B0120025; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 14:33:21 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=8778; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1576190001; x=1577399601; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=Due1To4Mpsg34w6qYBqQHfA66NhwmkIaZgKWJnQ2o9M=; b=UOhwWYvNoLo/r1fs+1UG5lAbOu3UbaNrZ7ooly1f7NugeM2pMpUDD/GY 09upZiTLdtq82RG/jxfOoRDzqTUKGt4VmMMUulboTkCxFR9B2+aMYRPUf CxNPyI0MmTsiO8/gpkq2HgY7YC6+6Bgt0RrczEtvK/W8nyx6MKDneIJ9f Y=;
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:twIBGRME9wY724jvsnYl6mtXPHoupqn0MwgJ65Eul7NJdOG58o//OFDEuKg/l0fHCIPc7f8My/HbtaztQyQh2d6AqzhDOIdJSwdDjMwXmwI6B8vQAEb2IdbhbjcxG4JJU1o2t3w=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0A6AADiv/Jd/51dJa1lGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBEQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBgW0BAQEBAQELAQGBSVAFbFggBAsqhAODRgOLDYJfmAaCUgNUCQEBAQwBARgLCgIBAYRAAheBcyQ3Bg4CAw0BAQQBAQECAQUEbYU3DEIWAYUFAQEBAQMBARAREQwBASwLAQsEAgEIDgMEAQEBAgIjAwICAiULFAEICAEBBAENBSKDAAGCRgMuAQIMo1kCgTiIYXWBMoJ+AQEFRoRCGIIXAwaBDigBjBcaggCBEAEnIIJMPoJkAQEDgUABAR4mgmoygiyQLoV4mE0KgjCHJI5VG4JCjDeLSI5LiEyOCoNnAgQCBAUCDgEBBYFoI4FYcBU7KgGCQVARFI0SDAUSg1CFFIMZgiZ0gSiIAYRAgjIBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.69,307,1571702400"; d="scan'208";a="683745181"
Received: from rcdn-core-6.cisco.com ([173.37.93.157]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 12 Dec 2019 22:33:20 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com (xch-aln-001.cisco.com [173.36.7.11]) by rcdn-core-6.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id xBCMXKBj013011 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 12 Dec 2019 22:33:20 GMT
Received: from xhs-rtp-002.cisco.com (64.101.210.229) by XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com (173.36.7.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 16:33:19 -0600
Received: from xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) by xhs-rtp-002.cisco.com (64.101.210.229) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 17:33:18 -0500
Received: from NAM11-DM6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (72.163.14.9) by xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 16:33:18 -0600
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=XSkvgLJ/cZGpDA11lsI/WXaHuIgVW1qw4fe/NSqieU48xS2ikH1NCSDguqQCnGXs3HF3YSqyYTK3KJmgvP7lfTj5sF6ssyg/sXPVWZzgxrQd9O9NwReLtoxg1AnrxBP/51rS2ejPu6ly4iWcp/oIs7L7/atIJPHQrjUJ8tuOWiIAuNSECLQNDXEyxFZXJ7ncjTtCgHHNEMQ7RsCS8CLJL/UfyFZCgIAMHBQEJXYe+hjTcU9BAAVtssW8izV/8j2b/PI/4tDrz68YKv10PSwOs6IkYhy8pGlC9NrdWYQ3ltPCPeKpZsbWsKVK47maDC7Ipicy1Kn13lSQcHZbg97OeQ==
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=Due1To4Mpsg34w6qYBqQHfA66NhwmkIaZgKWJnQ2o9M=; b=Upreh5HFyopPHuO5PnQy8+A3CZcDMRK3pc+DyKmqnaQ94AObWZbRPoS51JVKnJnaPinVjj+OQeUU082eR0o9aYTK6ibHkYgI38FRa2FL+kEZ5U0ioWuoawMD54cvsURTuy+4VI136nbAnLf0LCGEVFPf94LmG64AZeXUT+SDzZgpEqCACs7hAv413YW+HfdX12eiJONCGvjMJLdIrHcjDC3vyF67ENJ6UPs1+Arifchnm+7bt718WCYwgfNGGWB1Jt8oA/ljw8J8frP0ZdrRneRFxPqhxrZw0lUV1+k10YhJFN+bs+L+9EHjCWGWrHUio+8uAogn2Z8eIQ2z1VlYJw==
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=Due1To4Mpsg34w6qYBqQHfA66NhwmkIaZgKWJnQ2o9M=; b=w8iyMbSe2aeHZ7/jYh2/zCc+srpuiQm25Nn+eTJKjbvvT8dNZ890S/UODGtrp3M+43pHrjWjln/D70MJLWcCqaZQK2PaxL82KvlHoGKLCB7U9fMpGcoDtFDHrFl6iYw6jsNI50pwyS9V3i21VMEcfhR8sSs9lGlWVVwwarQTvGA=
Received: from BY5PR11MB4210.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (52.132.253.29) by BY5PR11MB3893.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (10.255.72.90) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2516.14; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 22:33:17 +0000
Received: from BY5PR11MB4210.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::51d6:76d:3ab8:563f]) by BY5PR11MB4210.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::51d6:76d:3ab8:563f%3]) with mapi id 15.20.2516.018; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 22:33:17 +0000
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>, "Wanghaibo (Rainsword)" <rainsword.wang@huawei.com>
CC: "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-rtgwg-ni-model@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-rtgwg-ni-model@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model
Thread-Index: AdVTYqP7HEGobTyKRLSJ6VQT3MRf2gI66BIAAA6vHoAQXeODgATEa24A
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2019 22:33:17 +0000
Message-ID: <38672C45-991E-42F6-8D2A-E001C7F0D75A@cisco.com>
References: <1E61161D6E31D849BEA887261DB609348C8F2E20@nkgeml514-mbx.china.huawei.com> <20190826203850.GH24671@pfrc.org> <1E61161D6E31D849BEA887261DB609348C90DB78@nkgeml514-mbx.china.huawei.com> <20191118110851.GK21134@pfrc.org>
In-Reply-To: <20191118110851.GK21134@pfrc.org>
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=acee@cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [2001:420:c0c4:1001::29]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: d7a73a29-4c89-4ea6-78b1-08d77f5348cd
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BY5PR11MB3893:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BY5PR11MB38934E8FF52D5D5F0DF2C722C2550@BY5PR11MB3893.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:8882;
x-forefront-prvs: 0249EFCB0B
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(376002)(39860400002)(346002)(396003)(136003)(366004)(13464003)(189003)(199004)(54906003)(91956017)(66574012)(6506007)(66946007)(66556008)(76116006)(110136005)(64756008)(6486002)(966005)(66446008)(33656002)(6512007)(8936002)(36756003)(53546011)(316002)(2906002)(4326008)(8676002)(86362001)(478600001)(81166006)(186003)(71200400001)(81156014)(2616005)(66476007)(5660300002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:BY5PR11MB3893; H:BY5PR11MB4210.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: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <A7CA1E56C66C674CADD8DA6EC19C8CC3@namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: d7a73a29-4c89-4ea6-78b1-08d77f5348cd
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 12 Dec 2019 22:33:17.5323 (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: MoYSSJISvxw3WLgkUgPrbB2C+xynw3gJD2yAr6HMTycG2jv/5GiVkqEG48ZyZbgO
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY5PR11MB3893
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.11, xch-aln-001.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-6.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/_F22vz3PHg8dGNieoMYlGJGdNIE>
Subject: Re: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model
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: Thu, 12 Dec 2019 22:33:24 -0000
I don’t think there is any ambiguity here. For BGP VPN configuration (e.g., RFC 4364), the BGP configuration will augment control-plane-protocols in the default network instance. References to other network instances, should use a leafref with an xpath pointing to the network-instance name. A BGP instance may also be configured as a control-plane protocol within a network-instance - either as a PE-CE protocol or simply for routing within the routing domain corresponding to the network-instance. Thanks, Acee On 11/18/19, 6:06 AM, "Idr on behalf of Jeffrey Haas" <idr-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of jhaas@pfrc.org> wrote: Per IDR mic comment, copying once again to IDR since I mis-laid the mail. My apologies, Haibo. If I understand your comment correctly, your question is "how do you bind a given routing instance (e.g. VRF) to a given BGP session?" If so, I think you are correct. We do not have a clean way to specify this. It may also have impacts on the network instancing model in general. Let us raise the issue with netmod working group. -- Jeff On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 03:39:17AM +0000, Wanghaibo (Rainsword) wrote: > Hi Jeff, > > Thanks for your reply. > > I have read this example. But it doesn't solve my doubts. > If I have two public bgp instance like this: > "ietf-routing:routing": { > "router-id": "192.0.2.1", > "control-plane-protocols": { > "control-plane-protocol": [ > { > "type": "ietf-routing:bgp", > "name": "bgp0", > "description": > "Bgp for CustomerA.", > "bgp": { > "neighbors":{ > "neighbor":[ > { > "remote-address":"192.0.2.1", > "peer-as":"64497" > "afi-safis":{ > "afi-safi":[ > "afi-safi-name":"bt:l3vpn-ipv4-unicast" > ] > } > } > ] > } > } > } > ] > "control-plane-protocol": [ > { > "type": "ietf-routing:bgp", > "name": "bgp1", > "description": > "Static routing is used for the internal network.", > "bgp": { > "neighbors":{ > "neighbor":[ > { > "remote-address":"192.0.3.1", > "peer-as":"64497" > "afi-safis":{ > "afi-safi":[ > "afi-safi-name":"bt:l2vpn-evpn" > ] > } > } > ] > } > } > } > ] > }, > > And I have two vrf instance like : > "ietf-network-instance:network-instances": { > "network-instance": [ > { > "name": "vrf-old", > ... > } > ] > } > "ietf-network-instance:network-instances": { > "network-instance": [ > { > "name": "vrf-new", > ... > } > ] > } > > I want to specify the vrf-old use bgp0 to advertise routes using l3vpn-ipv4-unicast, and use bgp1 for vrf-new to advertise routes using l2vpn-evpn with type5. > So how can I do this ? > > Regards, > Haibo > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jeffrey Haas [mailto:jhaas@pfrc.org] > Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2019 4:39 AM > To: Wanghaibo (Rainsword) <rainsword.wang@huawei.com> > Cc: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model@ietf.org; idr@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 12:32:01PM +0000, Wanghaibo (Rainsword) wrote: > > Hi authors, > > > > I have some question about the bgp model. > > > > In current model, the bgp module will augment to routing, > > /rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols > > /rt:control-plane-protocol: > > And the routing will schema mount to network-instance. > > > > In this model, how to realize the multiple bgp public instance, like that > > > > bgp instance 1 as-number 100 > > neighbor 2.2.2.2 > > address-family vpn-ipv4 > > vrf vpn1 > > neighbor 11.1.1.1 > > address-family ipv4 > > > > bgp instance 2 as-number 200 > > neighbor 3.3.3.3 > > address-family vpn-ipv4 > > vrf vpn2 > > neighbor 12.1.1.1 > > address-family ipv4 > > > > Bgp doesn't like ospf or isis, the vrf's bgp will associate to public bgp's special address family. > > I'm not find how to describe the associate in current model > > The bgp model uses NMDA: > augment "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/" > + "rt:control-plane-protocol" { > > You may find this example from RFC 8349 helpful: > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8349 > > : Appendix D. Data Tree Example > : [...] > : > : > : "ietf-routing:routing": { > : "router-id": "192.0.2.1", > : "control-plane-protocols": { > : "control-plane-protocol": [ > : { > : "type": "ietf-routing:static", > : "name": "st0", > : "description": > : "Static routing is used for the internal network.", > : > > The definition of control plane protocols permits multi-instancing via name: > > : container control-plane-protocols { > : description > : "Support for control-plane protocol instances."; > : list control-plane-protocol { > : key "type name"; > : description > > -- Jeff _______________________________________________ Idr mailing list Idr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
- [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model Wanghaibo (Rainsword)
- Re: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model Linda Dunbar
- Re: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model Wanghaibo (Rainsword)
- Re: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model Linda Dunbar
- Re: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model Jeffrey Haas
- Re: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model Wanghaibo (Rainsword)
- Re: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model Jeffrey Haas
- [Idr] 答复: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model Wanghaibo (Rainsword)
- Re: [Idr] 答复: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model Yingzhen Qu
- Re: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model Wanghaibo (Rainsword)
- Re: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model Robert Raszuk
- Re: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model Acee Lindem (acee)