Re: [Idr] WG LC on draft-ietf-idr-large-community-03.txt (10/17/2016 to 10/31/2016)

Gert Doering <gert@space.net> Sat, 22 October 2016 12:27 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 1ED7D1297E4 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 22 Oct 2016 05:27:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.031
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.031 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431] 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 gm4vOdBMlrpO for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 22 Oct 2016 05:27:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mobil.space.net (mobil.space.net [195.30.115.67]) (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 2FEBD1297B8 for <idr@ietf.org>; Sat, 22 Oct 2016 05:27:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: idr@ietf.org
Received: from mobil.space.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 927CA60F0D for <idr@ietf.org>; Sat, 22 Oct 2016 14:27:36 +0200 (CEST)
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
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 38938602AF; Sat, 22 Oct 2016 14:27:36 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by moebius4.space.net (Postfix, from userid 1007) id 1BD7D32BF2; Sat, 22 Oct 2016 14:27:36 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2016 14:27:35 +0200
From: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
To: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Message-ID: <20161022122735.GC79185@Space.Net>
References: <01f301d228b4$e3319ef0$a994dcd0$@ndzh.com> <20161017215134.GA464@pfrc.org> <20161018190851.GC15392@shrubbery.net> <20161018191521.GT95811@Vurt.local> <9EFC9BAA-F917-4C70-A139-1F69CAECF9C0@pfrc.org> <20161020215938.GE1074@Vurt.local> <adb00bcd7b8e45db857eae7019c646fc@XCH-ALN-014.cisco.com> <ae5da282-201c-f745-9f26-67ce73826bd5@i3d.net> <CA+b+ERkV2PBtzzx=uoygDzvTyJzunROCNX=0Y4phvGdn=oK5Xw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CA+b+ERkV2PBtzzx=uoygDzvTyJzunROCNX=0Y4phvGdn=oK5Xw@mail.gmail.com>
X-NCC-RegID: de.space
User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.1 (2016-04-27)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/gRkgBjeK5YTXXb1ClholTFBQz-4>
Cc: heasley <heas@shrubbery.net>, IETF IDR WG <idr@ietf.org>, Sue Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
Subject: Re: [Idr] WG LC on draft-ietf-idr-large-community-03.txt (10/17/2016 to 10/31/2016)
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: Sat, 22 Oct 2016 12:27:42 -0000

Hi,

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 05:42:37PM +0200, Robert Raszuk wrote:
> > Secondly, there's literally no way for the vendor to check whether an
> > ASN belongs to "the entity that defines the meaning of the rest of the
> > Large Community"
> 
> Why not ?
> 
> If you do not make those 4 octets configurable by spec and always fill it
> with AS number defined in your BGP instance you will have assurance it
> is ASN of the entity that defines the rest 8 octets of the LC as otherwise
> you will likely not establish any EBGP sessions to your peers.

But that is only half the intended usage of communities - one is
"I tag it with <myas>:<some meaning>" to signal something to my own
routers or my customers.

The other one is "I tag it with <jobs as>:<some meaning>", and there is
no way for my router to validate that "<jobs as>" is indeed the one
who defined "<some meaning>".

So, how exactly is the vendor to check variant B?

(And if you do not understand what people use communities for, today,
maybe you should not be argueing these points, sorry)

> So there is very easy way to enforce it today in any BGP implementation.

No.

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