Re: [Idr] [GROW] Question about BGP Large Communities

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Tue, 04 February 2020 22:18 UTC

Return-Path: <robert@raszuk.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 9C4CE1200B7 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 14:18:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.987
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.987 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, BODY_ENHANCEMENT=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=raszuk.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 iSHD5JalEVIX for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 14:18:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ot1-x331.google.com (mail-ot1-x331.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::331]) (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 E726012003F for <idr@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 14:18:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ot1-x331.google.com with SMTP id 66so17877otd.9 for <idr@ietf.org>; Tue, 04 Feb 2020 14:18:48 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=raszuk.net; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=PFbi91tRiNGXeEmIHuQX11q7VviZ0SmNfg0DFyyfcmA=; b=YQmMhpohM1W2euZrlrQZcirBz5VhojwHY1Limobr8xyVGY3YZpJNSZkA8cOJHRp8eV j6YrnlGLYav6ZlN5JP/Z0qzTIKvr0BUDmKYCanmIiGQV49z/eZGpIU5z2EKeQhMpdGbK mKDiWHj44L234Oaw/XQck4wNc0Up8c1WLGd2WvCKYQaYKceZb9V1xIekopyo78/6RRm2 KM+SVnlR6Hu2qjxHEASnqKqL/zdf86nlgOi0FvnfJIfLJ4A9JZeCwOCwvs69t8hU9BOH jNZzgPrcgjTepGoijXDc7go2wkekQd89X/EqRpsIc5LYN0WLOK0fQOJY3qr/nwcMxKQK YcIA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=PFbi91tRiNGXeEmIHuQX11q7VviZ0SmNfg0DFyyfcmA=; b=crCZ8YKD8uowtXN2opZiG9zCuyuCBJavzunL2nZwnzqZ6nF5t/j+Ojp3btnv+VjGy6 Dv+c7qNycrXKcYvlg340LTDgFYr6bR3S8tEY4L11Z/QO2qil0NVjySigRkDhI4XR/AuN vXCYCeDcuTCN0i/O9rhkn1B6m+2Ej5xtQLOj8dOX7jC2nWDr8egf/IAfyexCzcrGC72S 3O0/eX15o82Q9bqhUsgi04NNHesyc4ZjDj+mQHWVEXDjAh3XY7rhqzhdor7zD8l9nqXC 5suyLLywS+wDdiks5uVBiDwHIKzyG8Vlgvx06PYaDIGnzzhVPkR/TSl0PiVaS6seSxSG PdbQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUo2FXMSmfnsnrWfidPR8hoIZMPystIoTkchg8ZwphxeimNlf1M livCRIB7+cTxG1i8A3tzjghW5RmpFCxDrcjVSWDflQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxEGiLqL/mHWYiYXOK5RmaH69paUsa45OKbuE6qs+TWsyzsFypnQAktWjrnNClceu+BddUPXayRQKAAwPUJvPI=
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:7083:: with SMTP id l3mr22692044otj.193.1580854728157; Tue, 04 Feb 2020 14:18:48 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <DM6PR09MB54489301E52DD711E031400984030@DM6PR09MB5448.namprd09.prod.outlook.com> <BN6PR11MB1890AA431F63030DFE310902C0030@BN6PR11MB1890.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <BN6PR11MB1890AA431F63030DFE310902C0030@BN6PR11MB1890.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2020 23:18:37 +0100
Message-ID: <CAOj+MMH-xff0VUBy5UZZp7FH7_ES5A5ZCcUqFin2UP0hOnpjug@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Jakob Heitz (jheitz)" <jheitz@cisco.com>
Cc: "Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed)" <kotikalapudi.sriram@nist.gov>, Job Snijders <job@ntt.net>, Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>, John Heasly <heas@shrubbery.net>, "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>, "grow-chairs@ietf.org" <grow-chairs@ietf.org>, "idr-chairs@ietf.org" <idr-chairs@ietf.org>, "grow@ietf.org" <grow@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000838225059dc76c9c"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/do-nAdB_KhDegThF0J3Dqdsx4eA>
Subject: Re: [Idr] [GROW] Question about BGP Large Communities
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 04 Feb 2020 22:18:50 -0000

And you think 255 such known large communities will be sufficient ?

Thx,
R.

On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 9:45 PM Jakob Heitz (jheitz) <jheitz@cisco.com>
wrote:

> A set of well known large communities could be useful.
>
> I have a draft that I never submitted attached to this email.
>
> Does anyone want to co-author and suggest changes?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Jakob.
>
>
>
> *From:* Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) <kotikalapudi.sriram@nist.gov>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 4, 2020 10:22 AM
> *To:* Jakob Heitz (jheitz) <jheitz@cisco.com>om>; Job Snijders <job@ntt.net>et>;
> Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>rg>; John Heasly <heas@shrubbery.net>
> *Cc:* idr@ietf.org; grow@ietf.org; idr-chairs@ietf.org;
> grow-chairs@ietf.org; a.e.azimov@gmail.com; Brian Dickson <
> brian.peter.dickson@gmail.com>
> *Subject:* Question about BGP Large Communities
>
>
>
> In the route leaks solution draft,
>
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-grow-route-leak-detection-mitigation-02
>
> we (the authors) have proposed using BGP Large Community.
>
> We specify this to be a "well-known transitive Large Community".
>
>
>
> Question:
>
> Can the draft simply make an IANA request for
>
> a Global Administrator ASN value for Route Leaks Protection (RLP) type
>
> and request that it be published in IANA registry
>
> as a "well-known Transitive Large Community"?
>
>
>
> There is no IANA registry for Large Communities yet;
>
> we have requested IDR and GROW Chairs to facilitate that.
>
>
>
> ----------------
>
> Details/background:
>
>
>
> We've read the following RFCs related to Large Communities:
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8092
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8195
>
>
>
> RFC 8195 has this table:
>
>
>                  +-------------------------------+-------------------------+
>
>                  |       RFC8092                    | RFC
> 8195                |
>
>
> +-------------------------------+--------------------------+
>
>                  | Global Administrator    |      ASN                     |
>
>                  |  Local Data Part 1           |    Function
> |
>
>                  |  Local Data Part 2           |   Parameter            |
>
>
> +--------------------------------+-------------------------+
>
> which is instructive. In the examples that RFC 8195 offers,
>
> it appears it is *assumed* that the Large Communities are transitive.
>
>
>
> For comparison, in Extended Communities (RFC 7153), there are
>
> explicit Type values assigned for Transitive, Non-transitive, etc.
>
>
> https://www.iana.org/assignments/bgp-extended-communities/bgp-extended-communities.xhtml
>
> However, there is no such explicit Type specification
>
> for Large Communities (in RFC 8092 or elsewhere).
>
>
>
> Thank you.
>
> Sriram
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GROW mailing list
> GROW@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
>