Re: [Idr] Fwd: Slot request in IDR to present https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-idr-bgp-route-refresh-options-00.txt

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Thu, 21 July 2016 16:22 UTC

Return-Path: <rraszuk@gmail.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 D525412D0B2 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Jul 2016 09:22:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.597
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.597 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 K4LuIGA8k7Vh for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Jul 2016 09:22:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt0-x233.google.com (mail-qt0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2820C12B028 for <idr@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Jul 2016 09:22:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt0-x233.google.com with SMTP id 52so46835842qtq.3 for <idr@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Jul 2016 09:22:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc; bh=u6nZy0qFxFrbmppUnsYKsE3+pC2gZGY4MM+4RG/8sXU=; b=nuQnbJRLy5HslHeOEhTOIt9rLDPK9Kn6ic1FDD0b2swqXMvzNwnXRV9Ilx/cbWZdWN CyWcFUvFu8kLx7F9xwLHcIMWQRjbQJMQzjA4jVs3iZm503CrIjfPASt9K+0Ww8naQY46 PYCaQ1ElElc4QeEi9VBp75O9Qrmcm67fG+2u/sUsbGUs7V2duzfmY9vxbdAe5H9TCAQ5 J4GMNJKdiGQkFK2eFIIeJfQdNikxufaN6KAhi7scUXJ68ad/c2luhcoCQty40xGkS7uw iodFIKWqi6RY0C94qL2RliBSuTpmtWv241NvSEQwATOsUcoCC69Y8pqi3/25CFF4CXL2 bR9Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=u6nZy0qFxFrbmppUnsYKsE3+pC2gZGY4MM+4RG/8sXU=; b=iRomB2Vc1ni6UDVITzX2EHySHku5ryw4utzIsvg0/Yze9F+0OldauQhr5dv72nkxoD kJHc5atrE5RtjRayYHNw7xG3q8PUhd4TBIoHoCANOMRMLaUyS7Uo35gNmNY0IWGATPCE XM8Zk99QyL+5YoDAfOldp7hx3QLDs3DeH8JOKx7GTJuFZmxHmvw51LGO79TqH7CxBSzn iIGh8ITTZ/b4aTGSpB+/FZ2xoMlV4oQHFxHoJ0hm2EeJb6qOkxvnv3Pgl1Wv1/ENQkWY efZMxjW3ymnFlIQIw2ufEEu4lL9IzuD0OU/1UhvLgRE6BAOFRMtL/cQuiPdKdQZ9q22R dTeg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tJVzVnQvGAtsSjzM8UIF03xlxNcaNwbSRfB5TUnQLV5FFG3rb5xJrrjws7MhhHl5WbZrOLtLCJqptQPzA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.200.35.169 with SMTP id q38mr60453667qtq.4.1469118165258; Thu, 21 Jul 2016 09:22:45 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: rraszuk@gmail.com
Received: by 10.237.36.90 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Jul 2016 09:22:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.237.36.90 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Jul 2016 09:22:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CA+wi2hNMtzhkugis35ja_NbtvckaGSeb+QdFUyj1uMHq6oRWng@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+wi2hM+y_K+_50Q_QRS64VBdzgBWtx8hL-6iepsVqed+NtqTw@mail.gmail.com> <CA+b+ERm2AnRAYeJRDdsAh=hLX81aQUTVd7Pe5PYLpWmHNvbgtQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+wi2hMsbVetW_D+HpsdXEHyh75yZkx+QTpj+FoX2hMTcqbrzw@mail.gmail.com> <CA+wi2hNk2+GLY0G800Uo8qgdZQWh=9AzFGhZTk+fWRd6isgriw@mail.gmail.com> <76CD132C3ADEF848BD84D028D243C92774EEF7CF@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com> <CA+b+ERnkkhYK7Cz5eG_8fuQ_cdeo3TSCK3sBQtA0SyfkGktwAg@mail.gmail.com> <D3B3F3D9.47283%keyupate@cisco.com> <CA+b+ERm+2HSu+QyU7pHsEXO9WKh9uavX2y4MtuSX=WADDYx_vg@mail.gmail.com> <D3B5343D.474BD%keyupate@cisco.com> <CA+b+ERn7Rb2=d7UFyxKC01dh7=JFpbnf+dd+_uL+UvAarnkE6w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+wi2hNjD+4Y3vfoDMXW2yzYiyv+9+Xhv=3ZTRumKkZcjY22Hg@mail.gmail.com> <CA+b+ER=_7P_Zg9GQYVT+RVMm9XB6H5o-r86axc0zyLnHf1f8fQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+b+ERnr_9y9ta3VW99xbDbtRS=9jnNy9mtkk+h6MZ8r2Rj3AQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+b+ERm39+UjahPJpQrGkAEGTguEQ_yQzNBoufR9wo7dOXDDbQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+wi2hNMtzhkugis35ja_NbtvckaGSeb+QdFUyj1uMHq6oRWng@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 18:22:45 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 1Iir9PsiJniLQSQAv3lEGS4SQlo
Message-ID: <CA+b+ERkJwY8ucxR-FnWuoLMFE48CWE_5GbMwQRNX_3Und8jfsA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
To: Tony Przygienda <tonysietf@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114034305f9a0b053827babd"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/dmv96j2I9dZ-qtfbH1XK9leKTbk>
Cc: "Keyur Patel (keyupate)" <keyupate@cisco.com>, idr wg <idr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Fwd: Slot request in IDR to present https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-idr-bgp-route-refresh-options-00.txt
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: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 16:22:48 -0000

Tony,

Sorry to be a bit stubborn here but I have not seen any valid reason for
this work.

Yes you have listed bunch if reasons in the original reply but non of those
apply.

Quoted below from your mail all below reasons require permanent filter not
one time as you must not only get the NLRI once .. you MUST also get all
updates to it when something changes supposedly also in subset way -
otherwise you get all SAFI (all MACs which is what you are trying to avoid
in the first place).

That is critical which you seems to be missing.

The debug thing is not sufficient justification.

Moreover as you confirm this work is not compatible with RTC and as you
confirmed you will not get anything over RTC filter in place. So to use one
time refresh RTC needs to be effectively disabled.

Your reasons:

"The motivation for this work were scenarios where a single-shot refresh is
needed, actually concurrent bunch of those based on configuration changes,
peer having dropped received routes based on specs (A-D), in policy
changes, joining VPNs, EVIs and so on. "

Thx,
R.