Re: [Idr] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-idr-ext-opt-param-11

John Scudder <jgs@juniper.net> Thu, 22 April 2021 19:22 UTC

From: John Scudder <jgs@juniper.net>
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
CC: "draft-ietf-idr-ext-opt-param.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-idr-ext-opt-param.all@ietf.org>, "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>, "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>, "last-call@ietf.org" <last-call@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-idr-ext-opt-param-11
Thread-Index: AQHXMi5QFpts+gbOQkiHOsnqDY8cbqq/hREAgAEgdICAAE/bAA==
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 19:22:45 +0000
Message-ID: <CF43ABFC-CA22-4FE3-BBC3-CFD9D0933C4A@juniper.net>
References: <161851524693.27672.11525659031465457077@ietfa.amsl.com> <E9D6193D-2485-498F-8D1C-42F207724CD2@juniper.net> <AM0PR07MB386095C3B5942BFFF6A6170E93469@AM0PR07MB3860.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <AM0PR07MB386095C3B5942BFFF6A6170E93469@AM0PR07MB3860.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_CF43ABFCCA224FE3BBC3CFD9D0933C4Ajunipernet_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 74487e28-0519-45eb-8d96-08d905c401d8
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 22 Apr 2021 19:22:45.0974 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: o9aSPm/x7lxKlynhsUhpApMMw4b2jLRZrXv2bWn30e2VLqmN667ZDL9A9MEwuzHB
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR05MB6493
X-Proofpoint-GUID: lU3l6xebaANT6sTmxxm7BvAW4UWsRp5Q
X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: lU3l6xebaANT6sTmxxm7BvAW4UWsRp5Q
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.391, 18.0.761 definitions=2021-04-22_12:2021-04-22, 2021-04-22 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_notspam policy=outbound_spam score=0 impostorscore=0 mlxscore=0 clxscore=1011 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 priorityscore=1501 spamscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 adultscore=0 malwarescore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2104060000 definitions=main-2104220143
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/eBnbS2tFyoFR9P2CxEXvpu9UIPA>
Subject: Re: [Idr] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-idr-ext-opt-param-11
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: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 19:22:55 -0000

Hi Christer,

I chose to leave the abstract alone, however I updated the introduction for -13, similar to your suggestion:

   This document updates [RFC4271] by extending, in a backward-
   compatible manner, the length of the Optional Parameters in BGP OPEN.
   This is done by using Optional Parameter Type 255 as a distinguished
   value, that indicates an extended Optional Parameters Length field
   follows and that the parsing of the BGP OPEN should be modified
   according to these procedures.  In this case the Parameter Length
   field of the individual Optional Parameters in the BGP OPEN message
   is also extended.

Thanks again for your feedback,

—John

On Apr 22, 2021, at 10:36 AM, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org<mailto:christer.holmberg=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org>> wrote:

[External Email. Be cautious of content]

Hi John,

>> Q1: As far as I understand, the document only defines a new BGP OPEN Optional
>> Parameter Type, but does not modify/add procedures in RFC 4271. So, is the
>> document really an update to RFC 4271? And, when reading RFC 5429, I cannot
>> find any text saying that new parameter types would require an update to RFC
>> 4271. I also looked at a few other RFCs that add new values to the BGP IANA
>> registry, and they were not updating any RFC.
>
> The document modifies the way a router parses the OPEN. It doesn’t just add a new type, indeed the new type is only added as a special token to tell the router to use the new procedures.

Would it be good to explicitly indicate that?

Something like:

   "This document updates RFC 4271 by extending, in a backward-compatible
   manner, the length of the Optional Parameters in the BGP OPEN, and by
   modifying the way a router parses the OPEN."

Regards,

Christer

> Nits/editorial comments:
>
> Q2: I suggest that Section 2 is renamed to  "New Optional Parameter Type code",
> or something like that. OR, if the document really is updating RFC 4271,
> perhaps "Update to RFC 4271".

I’ve adopted your second suggestion.

> Q3: I suggest that Section 3 is renamed to "Backward Compatibility", or
> something like that.

Done.

—John

--
last-call mailing list
last-call@ietf.org<mailto:last-call@ietf.org>
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!VekRXfZ40ytJtNm-1zuv9KJuAV1ydVIzwKvejYNnzo0ti0AsnFotbZxEvgsYrg$

[Idr] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-idr-e… Christer Holmberg via Datatracker
Re: [Idr] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-i… John Scudder
Re: [Idr] [Gen-art] Genart last call review of dr… Lars Eggert
Re: [Idr] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-i… Christer Holmberg
Re: [Idr] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of … John Scudder
Re: [Idr] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of … Christer Holmberg