IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] comments on draft-ietf-idr-rs-bfd

Gert Doering <gert@space.net> Wed, 02 August 2017 11:05 UTC

Return-Path: <gert@space.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 D3C1B131FF8 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Aug 2017 04:05:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 y_EyMQfOXh0Q for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Aug 2017 04:05:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mobil.space.net (mobil.space.net [195.30.115.67]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ECB77131FE6 for <idr@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Aug 2017 04:05:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: idr@ietf.org
Received: from mobil.space.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0688429CD for <idr@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Aug 2017 13:05:49 +0200 (CEST)
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
Received: from moebius4.space.net (moebius4.space.net [IPv6:2001:608:2:2::251]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8945429C9; Wed, 2 Aug 2017 13:05:49 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by moebius4.space.net (Postfix, from userid 1007) id A4CBB23D09; Wed, 2 Aug 2017 13:05:49 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2017 13:05:49 +0200
From: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
To: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Cc: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>, idr wg <idr@ietf.org>, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Message-ID: <20170802110549.GW45648@Space.Net>
References: <59807D1E.4050807@foobar.org> <20170801133109.fdupuhfooudham5d@hanna.meerval.net> <CA+b+ERmoKAoLr_6yAHSyqJKBGANHxVJMF8am0UQqoDhid_+ziw@mail.gmail.com> <m21souh3kn.wl-randy@psg.com> <CA+b+ERnOszgj_iM_sMnFBo=e7LUCsM1MhvZ8Jgh=fMNjUD4azA@mail.gmail.com> <20170802093233.GR45648@Space.Net> <CA+b+ERkqoXJ365DtMVtW94o7pPpkSqp=kouWdDOg+ohmgTqtGA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="d40veJ2BMmcx+T4O"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CA+b+ERkqoXJ365DtMVtW94o7pPpkSqp=kouWdDOg+ohmgTqtGA@mail.gmail.com>
X-NCC-RegID: de.space
User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.2 (2017-04-18)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/fG01yN0vQSvNtVeV670qewsHhYc>
Subject: Re: [Idr] comments on draft-ietf-idr-rs-bfd
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Wed, 02 Aug 2017 11:05:55 -0000

Hi,

On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 12:49:40PM +0200, Robert Raszuk wrote:
> Sure you can say that this is implementation detail ... but if you design
> protocol right implementation becomes much easier.
> 
> Q:
> 
> Let's consider a scenario that RS client has a view with some bgp policy.
> Now this client is using 1500 mtu lan and 9k mtu lan for ipv4 connectivity
> via ix.
> 
> As reachability to next hops may be different for each lan are we going to
> have two sessions of new safi between RS and said client ? Or are we in
> this case going to put such client into two different contexts on RS ?

If you have two independent LANs, I can not see primary IPv4 for two
different set of peers (aka "subnets of next-hops") go over a single 
eBGP session to a RS located outside the subnet for at least one of them.

OTOH I've never been at an IXP that has different-mtu VLANs and "joint" RS,
so I can't speak from experience here.

Seems the draft needs to document edge cases like this.

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444           USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email