IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] WG Last Call foir draft-ietf-idr-bgp-extended-messages (11/12 to 11/26)

"Jakob Heitz (jheitz)" <jheitz@cisco.com> Tue, 21 November 2017 22:58 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 0A9CA126B6E; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 14:58:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.52
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.52 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, 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 ENdlprTogcTd; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 14:58:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-5.cisco.com (alln-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.142.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A42D81241F5; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 14:58:05 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=22890; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1511305085; x=1512514685; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=wd4ogqFIJtFbHwqO1NaYjM6bGdX4Wd6WkoD8l8oKQ3g=; b=Xj7fO1Q2YOsOCKS0YK7uRhDnzNxPxxLA5PByj3TrzDRww7Oa3uy4qsPl 32e1eFXm/1NtkCu6PGzQaQmtJNSLEHi+yG42exkQeotFlcn+Oru4TuQKT N7Jw7VMaRzCx2gddjjGcPrMCoBJZ8/sN4FLW5Y4/U0tv7HHwSLdM5SeIA g=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CqAAAsrhRa/5RdJa1bGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQcBAQEBAYJKRC5mbicHg3iKH48qgX2IXI4GghEKGAEMhRYCGoRvPxgBAQEBAQEBAQFrKIUeAQEBBAEBIQpBCxACAQgRBAEBKAMCAgIfBgsUCQgCBA4FCIk2TAMVEKhSgieHOA2DLwEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARgFgzSCB4FVhRSCa4IKPR+CX4JjBZkiiF89AodwiCGEcIIfhgyLK4o2gj46iFoCERkBgTkBHzmBdHoVSYJkgxGBTneIagElB4EFgRQBAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="5.44,432,1505779200"; d="scan'208,217"; a="34159835"
Received: from rcdn-core-12.cisco.com ([173.37.93.148]) by alln-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 21 Nov 2017 22:58:04 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-012.cisco.com (xch-rcd-012.cisco.com [173.37.102.22]) by rcdn-core-12.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id vALMw4iO007632 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 21 Nov 2017 22:58:04 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-014.cisco.com (173.36.7.24) by XCH-RCD-012.cisco.com (173.37.102.22) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 16:58:04 -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 15.00.1320.000; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 16:58:04 -0600
From: "Jakob Heitz (jheitz)" <jheitz@cisco.com>
To: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
CC: Job Snijders <job@ntt.net>, idr wg <idr@ietf.org>, "idr-ads@ietf.org" <idr-ads@ietf.org>, Idr <idr-bounces@ietf.org>, Thomas Mangin <thomas.mangin@exa.net.uk>
Thread-Topic: [Idr] WG Last Call foir draft-ietf-idr-bgp-extended-messages (11/12 to 11/26)
Thread-Index: AdNcB5lUqir6ZylBRUe7xuFnWiyeYQG3eYqAAAg/8gAAAS+JgAAAPKYAAAK34gAAABCKgAAChkQAAAJHFYAABIDZoAAEYC2AAAx+mpA=
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 22:58:03 +0000
Message-ID: <88d5df779a344b588745108c771d3145@XCH-ALN-014.cisco.com>
References: <000901d35c08$3f12d950$bd388bf0$@ndzh.com> <B61C3B8F-1168-4EB1-8D8E-88C4BF28B3AA@exa.net.uk> <CA+b+ER=1sHhAqhOc2VipzZMB+Zsxk8n+8cNUshkjPw_A9k9E-A@mail.gmail.com> <39049A8C-6D47-4251-AF87-342F68DDE8AE@exa.net.uk> <CA+b+ER=ANs15BEmRKeqneVHNcTSCsGDMVDQgFV4OucwPSWcLgw@mail.gmail.com> <CACWOCC9Yde99EbhLrveCtoUVSZWiP=sL=k69zrGBeNj5AjCGFQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+b+ERk_2XZ_Y3EqSjNAbSi1ZqKhD2oThrRR2EOJzckQ41GijA@mail.gmail.com> <CACWOCC-EfzOYdUrHAWQN10LBzofySrKRADc6Zq-dyca1o0DPvw@mail.gmail.com> <CA+b+ER=ppm1N2wnMrPxxS_Nug2EaETBkW5gASTVZ2UKKq0aZJA@mail.gmail.com> <976743ea96934039a85fa74415b45862@XCH-ALN-014.cisco.com> <CA+b+ERmpEghcndHKM+WKKxg1V8ufTwg=xqb0J5jNowZHj2OwAQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+b+ERmpEghcndHKM+WKKxg1V8ufTwg=xqb0J5jNowZHj2OwAQ@mail.gmail.com>
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: [10.154.131.82]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_88d5df779a344b588745108c771d3145XCHALN014ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/akaN0AiQ_DOMy9Ug-8C0tl9ka3Y>
Subject: Re: [Idr] WG Last Call foir draft-ietf-idr-bgp-extended-messages (11/12 to 11/26)
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 22:58:08 -0000

Just that it does it without error.
If the numbers are too large, we should discuss reasonable limits.

Thanks,
Jakob

From: rraszuk@gmail.com [mailto:rraszuk@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Robert Raszuk
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 2:55 PM
To: Jakob Heitz (jheitz) <jheitz@cisco.com>
Cc: Job Snijders <job@ntt.net>; idr wg <idr@ietf.org>; idr-ads@ietf.org; Idr <idr-bounces@ietf.org>; Thomas Mangin <thomas.mangin@exa.net.uk>
Subject: Re: [Idr] WG Last Call foir draft-ietf-idr-bgp-extended-messages (11/12 to 11/26)

Hi Jakob,

I think what you added is fine, but requires a time limit.

Statement that implementation can receive, parse/validate, display in CLI or match in the policy 16K of communities all actions taking 1h each is rather not that interesting isn't it ?

Or is the indicator of spec compliance a statement that it just does not crash regardless of time it takes for execution of each stated action :) ?

Thx,
//R.





On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 11:38 PM, Jakob Heitz (jheitz) <jheitz@cisco.com<mailto:jheitz@cisco.com>> wrote:
The new update message size requires support for:
16375 communities
8187 extended communities
5458 large communities
I have not changed the as-path length, because it is already ridiculously high.
If anyone wants to talk about a maximum as-path length, please speak up.

I have added tests to the implementation report
https://trac.ietf.org/trac/idr/wiki/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-extended-implementations
to ensure full compliance with the consequences of the draft.

Implementers, please update your compliance.

Thanks,
Jakob

From: Idr [mailto:idr-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:idr-bounces@ietf.org>] On Behalf Of Robert Raszuk
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 10:41 AM
To: Job Snijders <job@ntt.net<mailto:job@ntt.net>>
Cc: idr wg <idr@ietf.org<mailto:idr@ietf.org>>; idr-ads@ietf.org<mailto:idr-ads@ietf.org>; Idr <idr-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:idr-bounces@ietf.org>>; Thomas Mangin <thomas.mangin@exa.net.uk<mailto:thomas.mangin@exa.net.uk>>
Subject: Re: [Idr] WG Last Call foir draft-ietf-idr-bgp-extended-messages (11/12 to 11/26)

Great !

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 6:35 PM, Job Snijders <job@ntt.net<mailto:job@ntt.net>> wrote:
Robert/Randy,

About this being a default:

Old (Section 4):

A BGP speaker that is willing to send and receive BGP Extended Messages with a peer SHOULD advertise the BGP Extended Message Capability to the peer using BGP Capabilities Advertisement RFC5492].

New (Section 4)

A BGP speaker that is capable to send and receive BGP Extended Messages with a peer SHOULD advertise the BGP Extended Message Capability to the peer using BGP Capabilities Advertisement [RFC5492].


_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
Idr@ietf.org<mailto:Idr@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email