Re: [Idr] community of the day - common header

Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> Fri, 09 September 2016 11:57 UTC

Return-Path: <nick@foobar.org>
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 D272612B10C for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Sep 2016 04:57:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-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 DLORPNfgK6MC for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Sep 2016 04:57:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.netability.ie (mail.netability.ie [IPv6:2a03:8900:0:100::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5CAD712B038 for <idr@ietf.org>; Fri, 9 Sep 2016 04:57:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Envelope-To: idr@ietf.org
Received: from crumpet.local (089-101-195156.ntlworld.ie [89.101.195.156] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.netability.ie (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id u89BvTbs056851 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 9 Sep 2016 12:57:30 +0100 (IST) (envelope-from nick@foobar.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: cheesecake.ibn.ie: Host 089-101-195156.ntlworld.ie [89.101.195.156] (may be forged) claimed to be crumpet.local
Message-ID: <57D2A3A8.70904@foobar.org>
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2016 12:57:28 +0100
From: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
User-Agent: Postbox 4.0.8 (Macintosh/20151105)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>
References: <20160908214031.GA23544@pfrc.org>
In-Reply-To: <20160908214031.GA23544@pfrc.org>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/nVEIctZ2A_bi7g_XEiy9m76lEV8>
Cc: idr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Idr] community of the day - common header
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: Fri, 09 Sep 2016 11:57:36 -0000

Jeffrey Haas wrote:
> I'm not particularly fond of the theater that has gone into this discussion
> - and good will has been burned by that theater.  But regardless of the
> proposal to implement 4:4, 4:4:4, N:4 ipv6:4 or whatever we invent next
> month, let's nip this bit of deployment madness.

Jeff,

most people who have chimed in on this conversation understand the
underlying issues here:

- is -large- useful enough to dedicate an entire path attribute to it?
- do we try to merge with wide or something equivalent?
- do we aim for perfection or good enough?

Balanced against this, IANA allocated their last 16-bit ASNs at the end
of July this year, which means that the RIR tanks are nearly dry.  The
operator community has desperately needed >= 32b:32b for several years,
but no-one has made progress fixing this problem, until a couple of
months ago.

Our situation now is:

- the operational people who have contributed to this conversation think
that large is going to work for their requirements, and is worth deploying.

- there is running code (xr, bird and exabgp) which implements the large
proposal, and commitments from a bunch of other stacks, including non
open-source vendors.

- when you add new community subtypes, the point of diminishing returns
associated with the extra functionality is reached very quickly indeed.

- the existing 6-octet path attribute is still sufficient to deal with
signaling stuff that it was designed to handle.

- there has been no substantial progress on wide in 6 years.

There is nothing wrong with planning a kitchen sink approach.  The wide
draft has been adopted by IDR and nothing is stopping people from
working on it.  But in the best-case situation, it is still many years
away from wide-scale deployment.

If we were having this conversation in 2008-2009, which was the first
time that lack of >= 32b:32b communities started causing serious
operational problems, I'd be a good deal more sanguine about things.
But that time is over: it's 7 years later, and the entire operational
community is now staring at a fast-approaching brick wall.

Nick