IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Idr] Progressing draft-ietf-idr-rfc5575bis -- implementation reports?

John Scudder <jgs@juniper.net> Tue, 26 June 2018 14:37 UTC

Return-Path: <jgs@juniper.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 8819D130DF6; Tue, 26 Jun 2018 07:37:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 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_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=juniper.net
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 GapJL9YKibQa; Tue, 26 Jun 2018 07:37:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com (mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com [208.84.65.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 823111292F1; Tue, 26 Jun 2018 07:37:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0108156.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w5QEXXmH026773; Tue, 26 Jun 2018 07:37:40 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=PPS1017; bh=jmsgfsdD6cjw/GKu3Nw4GfF0JT+nWTUjTwtPOci82QM=; b=eSKaxwfwU+oxDQZ6ojeRYRJok+P79E8NY3ZFXMLoP/KnLHCkEm1UUNUaQcS5FA/HJscf UfpjTRoqKCE1FxPDe4le4Tjwwgh8T0u3jFQ6Hplft4gWO2Ot+M2T6RHNC5XaglgVIcmb gUsSG803fb4egJLYcgbhPN8kfdtjVUdCOWzbdiK+Ht7/fnZ1ydSINXZpcOHhskiuu0fk T05kkZXB3+ThZEZLqv40Tt035woBaOo6YDoVsq3w3cZpTPXD21XOL99hrNaYoW8xTnTX tot6wQyxyoPzjGTJGMUsMUCEefuwaCbP9a94WPzxeALqYyQdi1w4FRTtUMTge49FYSh1 Kw==
Received: from nam01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2nam01lp0175.outbound.protection.outlook.com [216.32.181.175]) by mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2jupcsr477-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 26 Jun 2018 07:37:40 -0700
Received: from SN6PR05MB4560.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (52.135.75.146) by SN6PR05MB4080.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (52.135.66.150) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.906.15; Tue, 26 Jun 2018 14:37:39 +0000
Received: from SN6PR05MB4560.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::b890:b360:69e5:7fd2]) by SN6PR05MB4560.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::b890:b360:69e5:7fd2%4]) with mapi id 15.20.0863.016; Tue, 26 Jun 2018 14:37:38 +0000
From: John Scudder <jgs@juniper.net>
To: "draft-ietf-idr-rfc5575bis@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-idr-rfc5575bis@ietf.org>
CC: "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Progressing draft-ietf-idr-rfc5575bis -- implementation reports?
Thread-Index: AQHUDVs7ape/TXMQ50qSjzSNlhXw9g==
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2018 14:37:38 +0000
Message-ID: <289A4A15-675C-4C56-810D-B5809434A669@juniper.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.11]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; SN6PR05MB4080; 7:/w2tXHHfRV8iy51IlIjJ7cCDOfNwtMyEZVsuf1iEpyy+iKtVN26WNuXU5ON4j2OsKJGZvI1MNvXxuHp8dHCgT1OESaaLGsuGlInwVzao1U4xvvdXFJagOhWFTNmekvIq0R4UVpVgTq+k9RZKBgajdKnF1D8DrNwZEzziMkXP6JHYSiL5uVzV6pifmbtwKTpZ4rM81lVy7WOOzhOOyXp2KdgXbsxDLsWZvqvnxRp6+HTt0VqyqfAXVlVKUH/Q/Mkc
x-ms-exchange-antispam-srfa-diagnostics: SOS;
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: fa1a02a3-de70-4522-7606-08d5db725dd2
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(7020095)(4652020)(8989117)(4534165)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990107)(5600026)(711020)(48565401081)(2017052603328)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:SN6PR05MB4080;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: SN6PR05MB4080:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <SN6PR05MB4080A42DD2800782855B10A0AA490@SN6PR05MB4080.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(20558992708506)(176510541525296);
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(8211001083)(6040522)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(10201501046)(3002001)(93006095)(93001095)(3231254)(944501410)(52105095)(6055026)(149027)(150027)(6041310)(201703131423095)(201702281528075)(20161123555045)(201703061421075)(201703061406153)(20161123564045)(20161123560045)(20161123558120)(20161123562045)(6072148)(201708071742011)(7699016); SRVR:SN6PR05MB4080; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:SN6PR05MB4080;
x-forefront-prvs: 071518EF63
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(396003)(136003)(346002)(39860400002)(376002)(366004)(53754006)(189003)(199004)(6306002)(86362001)(26005)(2351001)(2906002)(2616005)(68736007)(81166006)(82746002)(8676002)(8936002)(6512007)(476003)(486006)(81156014)(186003)(14454004)(256004)(99286004)(102836004)(478600001)(83716003)(33656002)(2501003)(106356001)(6486002)(105586002)(5250100002)(2900100001)(5660300001)(53936002)(97736004)(4326008)(305945005)(7736002)(450100002)(6916009)(66066001)(316002)(36756003)(6116002)(3846002)(966005)(25786009)(5640700003)(6506007)(6436002)(42262002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:SN6PR05MB4080; H:SN6PR05MB4560.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: Z28V/vyQCnmsUqPDaG1Rgvoyc9LVhtSGXzl1igAjkSo39oh8HY/j+BXrNuA96Dlf6YofNxPaURzf033EEE7U8ESJkiG9iTnAZ3OEsNUcBmzpH0+0cg1qi24fLMgR4hGu5LiKgQHC19Wd77IWusBRrr+UK8P03HmQhpIKUxsZ+lpsUFUpVGYwMA8y7FYVPh6f61xtW6+tUKhjFxXNqZkpSQp2/IGCGW6D75152Ztpwt5l9cqu8XmGvPiYktIolZUWpftJFR/MFAVT8xRT9q3tI7W7fG3F5JRP91ESmBvuSGTUreo/NrzvLfVFYNzf5Br3UF1aDKCjHEYS7ig69kRfv1M6U9kjD4KU6kRKNm1bta8=
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <BCCFBA37C4D4EF48A75F3B2BBC6C22B1@namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: fa1a02a3-de70-4522-7606-08d5db725dd2
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 26 Jun 2018 14:37:38.8996 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN6PR05MB4080
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2018-06-26_08:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_notspam policy=outbound_spam score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=918 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1806210000 definitions=main-1806260166
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/dalJC7zM0jG9Pft9y9Ip7PnaneU>
Subject: [Idr] Progressing draft-ietf-idr-rfc5575bis -- implementation reports?
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
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, 26 Jun 2018 14:37:46 -0000

Hi All,

I've just been reviewing the mailing list traffic on draft-ietf-idr-rfc5575bis as well as the shepherd's report. It looks to me like we're ready to go, except that we have no reported implementations, at least I don't see anything at https://trac.ietf.org/trac/idr/wiki/Protocol%20implementations%20Reports, and the shepherd report reflects this too.

I'm hoping this will be easy to remedy since this is of course a bis document intended to clarify things, so hopefully many or most existing flowspec implementations already comply. If we can get a few reported soon, that will make for smooth sailing. 

Thanks,

--John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email