Re: [Idr] IDR Charter discussion

["Susan Hares" <[e-mail]>]

Job:

Thanks for the feedback.   Let me think on the wordsmithing of the charter. 

Sue 

-----Original Message-----
From: Job Snijders [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2019 11:12 AM
To: Susan Hares; [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [Idr] IDR Charter discussion

Dear Susan, group,

On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 03:51:03PM -0400, Susan Hares wrote:
> The IDR Charter was last revised in March, 2010. 
> 
> It's time to reconsider what needs to go in the charter: 
> 
> Somethings we might include are:

It may be good to consider some operations and management functions to be
specced out in IDR.

>From the operational side of the house I recall a few long-standing
wishes:

    - ability to see which prefixes are accepted/rejected by the
      EBGP neighbor
    - ability to see the maximum prefix limits configured by the
      EBGP neighbor
    - ability to relay some contact / circuit details over an EBGP
      session to facilitate inter-organization coordination

All of the above can be accomplished in non-realtime through out-of-band
mechanisms like e-mail and phone; but this type of out-of-band channels
often are error-prone.

I think we would benefit from actively shifting some of this OAM from
out-of-band into the BGP protocol itself so less coordination is needed
between autonomous system operators.

I am not sure how to exactly word a high level milestone suitable for the
charter. "Add more OAM"? "Add more operational debugging capabilities"? 

Kind regards,

Job