Re: [Idr] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-ietf-idr-large-community-11: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

"Jakob Heitz (jheitz)" <jheitz@cisco.com> Wed, 04 January 2017 20:21 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 9557D129AAA; Wed, 4 Jan 2017 12:21:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -17.622
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.622 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-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
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 9Lr1hFXI5v1P; Wed, 4 Jan 2017 12:21:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.86.73]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B40AF129A88; Wed, 4 Jan 2017 12:21:02 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3325; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1483561262; x=1484770862; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=0xDB3/IKkpXwx7HyGMpERT24wKRVQbYmwlDCJIDMnv0=; b=Gv5uC2POfx/BNDN6ARRs88AM8DJ8Rlm0CcBBxOE8x7CVVlwKCa9yvk/p yYm0agq7TSE8GYELm3mccIaZNuIJzF1WvH9W0XPjP4T3ijWCAXUwk6gJb HgQqR11op6NjNiuXPj1xdekE5MGQ3kirkDMgrt/I/yWzle9rwFXkgc7Pz Y=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AUAQDAWG1Y/4wNJK1eGQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBBwEBAQEBgzgBAQEBAR+BaweNUJRIh36LFYIPggiGIgKBVj8UAQIBAQEBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BYyiEaAEBAQQ6PwwEAgEIEQQBAQEeCQchERQJCAIEAQ0FCAwFiDwDGLIVh0ENg?= =?us-ascii?q?l0BAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEdhkWEYYJOh1sFiHORXjgBiWeDX4NxkGK?= =?us-ascii?q?JdYhKAR84gSuEEgIfGIFGcoclAYEMAQEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,317,1477958400"; d="scan'208";a="193294979"
Received: from alln-core-7.cisco.com ([173.36.13.140]) by rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 04 Jan 2017 20:20:48 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-008.cisco.com (xch-aln-008.cisco.com [173.36.7.18]) by alln-core-7.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v04KKmCS004168 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 4 Jan 2017 20:20:48 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-014.cisco.com (173.36.7.24) by XCH-ALN-008.cisco.com (173.36.7.18) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Wed, 4 Jan 2017 14:20:47 -0600
Received: from xch-aln-014.cisco.com ([173.36.7.24]) by XCH-ALN-014.cisco.com ([173.36.7.24]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Wed, 4 Jan 2017 14:20:47 -0600
From: "Jakob Heitz (jheitz)" <jheitz@cisco.com>
To: "John G. Scudder" <jgs@juniper.net>, "Benoit Claise (bclaise)" <bclaise@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-ietf-idr-large-community-11: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHSZqWFUmGq1C8fDk+RJ+bRj4wJEaEpDCSAgAAS7AD//6KlIA==
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 20:20:47 +0000
Message-ID: <b4b6264470914c1d8527f323ee30211f@XCH-ALN-014.cisco.com>
References: <148354156226.13001.17853336045471596840.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <748483d7-df5c-e961-15f5-5aa76b784a7e@gmail.com> <af1e79a9-c188-23e4-3e45-0acacac049c8@cisco.com> <20170104161329.GD53926@Vurt.local> <503f746a-7530-388f-4ed7-6868e53b7ff4@cisco.com> <5ED073F1-7EB7-438F-81DE-7287D48831EB@juniper.net>
In-Reply-To: <5ED073F1-7EB7-438F-81DE-7287D48831EB@juniper.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [128.107.151.21]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/aa_JrChzxeNn1PPw45JxKfrmCws>
Cc: "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>, "idr-chairs@ietf.org" <idr-chairs@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-idr-large-community@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-idr-large-community@ietf.org>, "rick.casarez@gmail.com" <rick.casarez@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-ietf-idr-large-community-11: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Wed, 04 Jan 2017 20:21:04 -0000

There is no need to change the text.

The attribute is in fact suitable for use with four-octet ASNs.
Since all ASNs can be represented in 4 octets, there is no problem.

Thanks,
Jakob.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John G. Scudder [mailto:jgs@juniper.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2017 11:51 AM
> To: Benoit Claise (bclaise) <bclaise@cisco.com>;
> Cc: Job Snijders <job@ntt.net>;; Ignas Bagdonas <ibagdona.ietf@gmail.com>;; The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>;; draft-ietf-idr-
> large-community@ietf.org; idr-chairs@ietf.org; idr@ietf.org; rick.casarez@gmail.com
> Subject: Re: Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-ietf-idr-large-community-11: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
> 
> Benoit,
> 
> I think the wording is accurate as written, but I see your point. I think your suggested wording is terse to a fault
> since it abandons the important "this will work with your four-byte ASN" information. IMO a change is not strictly
> needed, but if one is desired how about something like this?
> 
> OLD:
>    The attribute is suitable for use with four-octet
>    Autonomous System Numbers
> 
> NEW:
>    The attribute is suitable for use with all Autonomous System Numbers including four-octet
>    Autonomous System Numbers
> 
> Or a lawyer would probably say :-)
>    The attribute is suitable for use with, inter alia, four-octet
>    Autonomous System Numbers
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -John
> 
> > On Jan 4, 2017, at 1:43 PM, Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>; wrote:
> >
> > Hi Job,
> >
> > So basically, you're telling me: "The attribute is suitable for use with ASNs.", right?
> > Is this what needs to be in the abstract?
> >
> > Regards, B.
> >> Hi Benoit,
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jan 04, 2017 at 04:39:25PM +0100, Benoit Claise wrote:
> >>>> Global Administrator field is a 4 octet integer that is used to carry AS
> >>>> number but it is not mandatory to interpret it as an AS number only
> >>>> (while a typical use case is for carrying AS number) - two peers can
> >>>> agree on any value that has meaning between those peers. Representation
> >>>> on the wire is in network byte order, and 2 byte AS number will get
> >>>> naturally padded with two zero bytes in front. Virtually all deployments
> >>>> today are AS4 capable and use AS4 encoding even for AS number values
> >>>> that fit into 16 bit value range therefore AS number is a 4 octet entity
> >>>> already.
> >>> Then this sentence in the abstract "The attribute is suitable for use
> >>> with four-octet ASNs." is misleading, right? At least to me. The
> >>> attribute is suitable for four-octets ASNs and two-octets ASNs encoded
> >>> in four-octets. This would be more in line with "This field SHOULD be
> >>> an Autonomous System Number (ASN)" later on.
> >> I am under the impression that nowadays the IETF community considers all
> >> ASNs to be four-octet ASNs, however, some of those ASNs can be encoded
> >> as a two octet value. The Large Communities specification is suitable
> >> for usage in Autonomous Systems from all walks of life, where as rfc1997
> >> communities are unsuitable for all ASNs, specifically those ASNs which
> >> cannot be encoded as two-octet values.
> >>
> >> Kind regards,
> >>
> >> Job
> >> .
> >>
> >