Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-as-migration-04.txt

[Juan Alcaide <[e-mail]>]

Jeffrey,


Inline..


> It wouldn't surprise me though that the publication of this document as an
> RFC leads to various vendors implementing versions of the knobs they
> previously didn't support.
>

You mean vendors implementing 'prepend on incomming ebgp update'?
Possibly, but we shouldn't describe on a RFC only the suboptimal approach 
('prepend on outbound ibgp update')


> I think it's beyond the scope of any IETF document beyond yang and MIB
> modules to prescribe the name of a vendor's configuration knob. :-)
>
> (The astute reader will note that we'll have to settle on a name in the yang
> module.  See prior comments at the mic during IDR about IETF
> vendor-registered augmentation modules.)
>
So internal-alias, besides Juniper naming, is the 'official' name 
according to the yang module?

In anycase, since the draft describes multiple vendors implementations, it 
may be worth to describe the naming of others.

> You are welcome to provide text for such a thing but I would suggest it's
> not worth the review time of IDR.  The introduction of the internal toggle
> would effectively instantiate a sub-state machine within the overall state
> machine and be quite the mess.  I have long since lost my notes on the FSM
> during RFC 4271 standardization work, but had noted that it had some issues.
>
> Feel free to audit the FSM to see if you can find those issues again and see
> how this would interact with the errata. :-)

Don't want to do a deep inspection of the FSM ;-)
It's something more basic. Consider

- You can send only one AS in your open each time you try to establish a 
new session
- The As you send does not depend on the AS you receive (no negotiation)
- You can accept received AS to be accepted if it's one of the 2 
configured ones
- You must force AS you send and AS you receive to be the same.

>From the above, it can be deduced that if both speakers have the internal 
alias feature configured, they must send the same AS ast the first time 
they try to establish the session. And session must be formed with this 
AS. Otherwise, AS never match and session cannot be establish.

We could do something more complicated, but this would really be beyond 
the scope of the draft.


>
> --Jeff
>