IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-idr-rfc5575bis-21.txt

Christoph Loibl <c@tix.at> Thu, 16 April 2020 21:29 UTC

Return-Path: <c@tix.at>
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 D197C3A1133 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:29:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=tix.at
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 HDDIwbOyyL2u for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:29:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.fbsd.host (mail.fbsd.host [IPv6:2001:858:58::22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E65A83A0A8E for <idr@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:29:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tix.at; s=rev1; h=References:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:Date:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type :Message-Id:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=ejcAX+oUYWe5OsiTqnoHr22PIX+ScTL2CgAo/eWumwI=; b=EqY3kQz9MoXNy2zjmpJYgXZpcu +SaX3xZaWSn/pVSwDUWvFrYOf9jiS+xjPCVoKhfUl1agZl7JfxGWC5QDkwmIkjq91KZ9mu+AzcCEW M4nrzPNPF7ZT60Col1CPIYjcnQolJENoR06M3bpfhx5I2wU7IjNIUyVDY8ztltncRDtDA8mbGC5kN ZrSYzbVxuK71MD1K3nYHd2fdEBFHIREtzhFeY1ucPVi8CdqJstWrD9zihL5Hh+OYnTNXy13UO3EzU Qjotld5WDxNnia8DVIP7/uNPPSB1lU1NZ0HyqdGmn8rz4uGG+thKXltN3dZVwJt7RRT2SVrEYq4hi njl5EKmw==;
Received: from 213-225-13-127.nat.highway.a1.net ([213.225.13.127] helo=[192.168.88.217]) by mail.fbsd.host with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92.3) (envelope-from <c@tix.at>) id 1jPC4M-000PiH-VZ; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 23:29:14 +0200
From: Christoph Loibl <c@tix.at>
Message-Id: <1D2BE75C-A806-4641-BB54-C268DF9ECF30@tix.at>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_9D8890DC-0A06-4BC1-886F-DA54C59B998A"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.60.0.2.5\))
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2020 23:29:09 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CAMMESsxNWRDFkYw1xXDLwc0=3o458ZXaJ42+Q3kUSRucwfeHTw@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: IDR List <idr@ietf.org>
To: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
References: <158707090832.17830.2874378176498907427@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAB0BC60-25CA-490D-B40A-3A6502CB581A@tix.at> <CAMMESsxNWRDFkYw1xXDLwc0=3o458ZXaJ42+Q3kUSRucwfeHTw@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.60.0.2.5)
X-Scanned-By: primary on mail.fbsd.host (78.142.178.22); Thu, 16 Apr 2020 23:29:11 +0200
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/_Ghs26yK5y1XrL6T3k27jW0C39g>
Subject: Re: [Idr] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-idr-rfc5575bis-21.txt
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, 16 Apr 2020 21:29:20 -0000

Hi Alvaro,

I have taken some notes about this change in github which I did not send out yet:

The original suggestion for this change this was from:

Reviewer: Gyan Mishra

Nits/editorial comments:
7. Traffic Filtering Actions
This document defines a minimum set of Traffic Filtering Actions that
it standardizes as BGP extended community values [RFC4360]

Any mention of [RFC4360] should be updated with [RFC7153] IANA Registries for BGP Extended Communities.

This is from the notes on github that will go with the changes (tomorrow):

Since the paragraph is about the value not the BGP extended community itself I think this is feasible. However there is another Section 7.4. with a reference to RFC 4360 this is about technical aspects and encoding into the extended community values (pointing directly to sections of RFC 4360). I think this reference should not be changed.

However I have no strong opinion about the change in section 7. both documents are closely related one about the technical aspects (this is why I did not change section 7.4) and the other about organisation of the codepoints/values.

I can revert this reverence to point to RFC4360 again (which it initially did).

Cheers 
Christoph

-- 
Christoph Loibl
c@tix.at | CL8-RIPE | PGP-Key-ID: 0x4B2C0055 | http://www.nextlayer.at



> On 16.04.2020, at 23:16, Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi!
> 
> Just a counter-nit.
> 
> In §7, the reference to rfc4360 (where the extended communities are defined) shouldn’t have changed to rfc7153 (a reorganization of the registries).
> 
> Perhaps s/standardizes as BGP extended community values [RFC7153]/standardizes as BGP extended communities [RFC4360]
> 
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Alvaro.
> 
> On April 16, 2020 at 5:11:44 PM, Christoph Loibl (c@tix.at <mailto:c@tix.at>) wrote:
> 
>> I just uploaded the -21(!) revision of the rfc5575bis draft to correct the nits pointed out by the latest reviews.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email