Re: [Idr] IDR Charter discussion

Job Snijders <job@ntt.net> Mon, 22 July 2019 15:12 UTC

Return-Path: <job@instituut.net>
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 0C82F120338 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 08:12:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.648
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.648 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 jiiyttcgOJ5e for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 08:12:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt1-f179.google.com (mail-qt1-f179.google.com [209.85.160.179]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 77E591202F4 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 08:12:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt1-f179.google.com with SMTP id h21so38812017qtn.13 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 08:12:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=boLDenzZ7P6/qgQ5zal8P1zqV+ZJKWbBiqNZyYKPzZ8=; b=js5nAwqzZ9zFH3GU/zL6pU917J5gtC/Y2zO+rE0RgBajV8JV8aWUlMbcl5+7NA+5+J xCi86Bq34Vm9pbzrRAed61kBqAMsZrrSCsLuG0dHCYASKjNbbQxgUIf2ElP2phOuxhPz SNHpZ40XTbdm3paoC8u15VRL3dT1Pylvt9KOJLgIHfpAL8x3XyNdYirZkOhdKtS7Nr30 CuTk7ZEuvLVeUPSogPx756y46Zx8wb1d/d9zuhIYRggr9QN0/xtGTm7XcTVDJeoxeFqo nKS/+UVgPAKG9l02gqRqFVPApp8IffPfe4kPOaC5L9vSN8L+cGQayzYIfQ9CN8DVwdnd KY8w==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXktF6eViVWXvSFHiApKfOlBQ2hcH9D6Lj3kGyogsD6oQDgBOx5 GgjnVh3nL/57tcmh1qRfZsnsbvJL05Q=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxE1PpNmWZmOtmb/ph+QFE+d8vMPdYH5mBXgaUX0eYmADMjtPKgH9PuuvafftJv92ZJTi4x9g==
X-Received: by 2002:aed:3b94:: with SMTP id r20mr48968460qte.207.1563808319114; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 08:11:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vurt.meerval.net (dhcp-9ce6.meeting.ietf.org. [31.133.156.230]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o22sm16662628qkk.50.2019.07.22.08.11.54 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Mon, 22 Jul 2019 08:11:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (vurt.meerval.net [local]) by vurt.meerval.net (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPA id 5491733f; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:11:51 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:11:51 +0000
From: Job Snijders <job@ntt.net>
To: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>, jared@puck.nether.net
Cc: idr@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20190722151151.GS33367@vurt.meerval.net>
References: <022b01d51fc5$d6576dd0$83064970$@ndzh.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <022b01d51fc5$d6576dd0$83064970$@ndzh.com>
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/a2hEhsR52myMHnI7cmQ69RcE6uA>
Subject: Re: [Idr] IDR Charter discussion
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: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:12:06 -0000

Dear Susan, group,

On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 03:51:03PM -0400, Susan Hares wrote:
> The IDR Charter was last revised in March, 2010. 
> 
> It's time to reconsider what needs to go in the charter: 
> 
> Somethings we might include are:

It may be good to consider some operations and management functions to
be specced out in IDR.

>From the operational side of the house I recall a few long-standing
wishes:

    - ability to see which prefixes are accepted/rejected by the
      EBGP neighbor
    - ability to see the maximum prefix limits configured by the
      EBGP neighbor
    - ability to relay some contact / circuit details over an EBGP
      session to facilitate inter-organization coordination

All of the above can be accomplished in non-realtime through out-of-band
mechanisms like e-mail and phone; but this type of out-of-band channels
often are error-prone.

I think we would benefit from actively shifting some of this OAM from
out-of-band into the BGP protocol itself so less coordination is needed
between autonomous system operators.

I am not sure how to exactly word a high level milestone suitable for
the charter. "Add more OAM"? "Add more operational debugging capabilities"? 

Kind regards,

Job