Re: [Idr] IETF LC for IDR-ish document <draft-ietf-grow-bgp-reject-05.txt> (Default EBGP Route Propagation Behavior Without Policies) to Proposed Standard

Hi Enke,

100% agreed. I said the same to authors offline earlier today as well.

Every time you define a new AFI/SAFI one can make such AFI/SAFI mandatory
to have an inbound policy or not.

If authors would go that far and define new AFI/SAFI for IPv4 and IPv6
unicast so be it. The defaults there may be changed by such spec :) And
once accepted such new AFI/SAFI may share the routes with 1/1 & 2/1 for
IBGP propagation too.

Making it a Standards Track doc for all SAFIs MP-BGP is used today seems
like a pretty bad idea.

And as far as deployment practice we already have BCP document on this for
a while ... See section 6.3.1 of BCP194

REF: https://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp194#section-6.3.1

Cheers,
R.

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 12:53 AM, Enke Chen <enkechen@cisco.com> wrote:

> Hi, Folks:
>
> The document defines or changes the "default behavior" for EBGP.  However,
> the default
> behavior for a particular code base or release was set long time ago, and
> in some cases
> more than 20 years ago. To avoid breaking existing deployment in this
> case, the default
> behavior in the code can not be changed (with or without this document).
> Then it becomes
> a deployment practice for the policies to be configured.
>
> So it seems to me that "Standard Track" may not be the right
> classification for this
> document.  "Deployment recommendation or Practice" might be more
> appropriate.
>
> Thanks.  -- Enke
>
> On 4/19/17 9:49 AM, John G. Scudder wrote:
> > IDR folks,
> >
> > As many of you have already noticed, draft-ietf-grow-bgp-reject-05 has
> completed GROW WGLC and is now in IETF LC.
> >
> > As nobody other than Alvaro noticed (thank you for noticing, Alvaro!)
> draft-ietf-grow-bgp-reject-05 represents an update to RFC 4271, in that it
> mandates what a BGP implementation MUST do. See section 2 of the draft for
> the details. It's short and easy to read.
> >
> > If we had noticed this earlier, we would have either chosen to home the
> document in IDR, or explicitly made an exception to have GROW do the work.
> Given that we didn't, though, the plan is to continue progressing the draft
> as a GROW document. However:
> >
> > - As I understand it, the authors will add the Updates: 4271 header in
> addition to potentially taking in other comments from AD review.
> > - If anyone has a strong objection to the unusual procedure, please say
> so (either on-list, or to the chairs + AD).
> > - Please send any last call comments to the IETF LC (see below) although
> it's also OK to discuss here on the IDR list of course.
> >
> > Many IDR participants are also active in GROW and have had their say,
> but if you haven't, now's your chance.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > --John
> >
> >> Begin forwarded message:
> >>
> >> From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
> >> Subject: Last Call: <draft-ietf-grow-bgp-reject-05.txt> (Default EBGP
> Route Propagation Behavior Without Policies) to Proposed Standard
> >> Date: April 18, 2017 at 5:16:05 PM EDT
> >> To: "IETF-Announce" <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
> >> Cc: grow-chairs@ietf.org, grow@ietf.org, draft-ietf-grow-bgp-reject@
> ietf.org, christopher.morrow@gmail.com
> >> Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org
> >>
> >>
> >> The IESG has received a request from the Global Routing Operations WG
> >> (grow) to consider the following document:
> >> - 'Default EBGP Route Propagation Behavior Without Policies'
> >> <draft-ietf-grow-bgp-reject-05.txt> as Proposed Standard
> >>
> >> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
> >> final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
> >> ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2017-05-02. Exceptionally, comments may
> be
> >> sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the
> >> beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
> >>
> >> Abstract
> >>
> >>  This document defines the default behavior of a BGP speaker when
> >>  there is no import or export policy associated with an External BGP
> >>  session.
> >>
> >>
> >> The file can be obtained via
> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-grow-bgp-reject/
> >>
> >> IESG discussion can be tracked via
> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-grow-bgp-reject/ballot/
> >>
> >> This IETF LC, which originally concluded on 2017-04-18, is being
> >> extended to allow for additional input to be provided. Ops AD (for GROW)
> >> and Routing AD (for IDR) wish to ensure that cross WG discussions have
> >> had a chance to occur.
> >>
> >> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>