[Idr] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-large-community-11: (with COMMENT)
"Benoit Claise" <bclaise@cisco.com> Thu, 05 January 2017 08:25 UTC
Return-Path: <bclaise@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: idr@ietf.org
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43056129484; Thu, 5 Jan 2017 00:25:55 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.40.3
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <148360475527.20665.11545913165681988756.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2017 00:25:55 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/lRaPXdXAIHPoyLjKEUHRBsDr2hU>
Cc: idr@ietf.org, draft-ietf-idr-large-community@ietf.org, rick.casarez@gmail.com, idr-chairs@ietf.org
Subject: [Idr] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-large-community-11: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 05 Jan 2017 08:25:55 -0000
Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-idr-large-community-11: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-large-community/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks John for an excellent shepherd writeup. I see from the abstract: "The attribute is suitable for use with four-octet ASNs." I also see this text, which doesn't mention four-octet ASNs The Global Administrator field is intended to allow different Autonomous Systems to define BGP Large Communities without collision. This field SHOULD be an Autonomous System Number (ASN), in which case the Local Data Parts are to be interpreted as defined by the owner of the ASN. The use of Reserved ASNs (0 [RFC7607], 65535 and 4294967295 [RFC7300]) is NOT RECOMMENDED. What if the ASN is two bytes, we use padding? How? Even if we would say: "This field SHOULD be an four-octet Autonomous System Number (ASN)", it doesn't preclude inserting a two-octet ASN in the Global Administrator field. Isn't it better to specify how? >From RFC 6793: Currently assigned two-octet AS numbers are converted into four-octet AS numbers by setting the two high-order octets of the four-octet field to zero. Such a four-octet AS number is said to be mappable to a two-octet AS number. =============================== After some discussion on the idr list. My reasoning has been: either you mention that two-octet ASN can be represented in four-octets (RFC6793) or you mention: suitable for all ASNs (2 or 4) It's so obvious to you guys in your community. Ok, it seems that we're going in circle here. You guys understood my issue. It was DISCUSSed. I believe the draft should be clearer, but this is not DISCUSS-level point any longer. Moving to a COMMENT, and trusting the responsible shepherd and AD. For the record, John's proposal solveds my issue. OLD: The attribute is suitable for use with four-octet Autonomous System Numbers NEW: The attribute is suitable for use with all Autonomous System Numbers including four-octet Autonomous System Numbers
- [Idr] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-… Benoit Claise