Re: [Idr] [GROW] BGP Looking Glass Capability

Robert Raszuk <> Sun, 25 April 2021 22:48 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B474F3A1426 for <>; Sun, 25 Apr 2021 15:48:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id a2TezFCUzpTw for <>; Sun, 25 Apr 2021 15:48:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 96F3B3A1420 for <>; Sun, 25 Apr 2021 15:48:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id o16so61846212ljp.3 for <>; Sun, 25 Apr 2021 15:48:45 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=o7fzOu8C0sjspCmJ0JcL7PunqHqhIjYreljxxKHiq/M=; b=fjWZ7QLmBai/8yy7iwVmT1TU/buQfIKMRdyp09OBrTvya0Qs3djobH+jFAqcUB0yim DYezlPUPLzoj6gjyhGFShvaJ7HytM8lxOLb5PHsPbu6orLksdE7K24REDFD+ohYfyTVF dCPIG3NqrtU6O+MuIu1XXzm3EGRP6leP61x5VV5U+EegEvBeRooyboQuS60yvvhPC1JC NEF//bqetoi/OXBf02xrTy9anByQ8cJAKajZwF2tOjqDA72axcV6P5NKQL8mHJcdzFWK ppTrFKdqUMarcii+IHK8ZZtIpEdV/FvViEarCgG92SELy8ELaLAlsTR10vHhS7Uz4MHi nGDA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=o7fzOu8C0sjspCmJ0JcL7PunqHqhIjYreljxxKHiq/M=; b=LoUP8vSbzK7kro4ZW6KGVVDXRnVM78rfPWdEy05AwuUh0ZYzzHTe+xe1qVhAsmFtB9 Iji4Xhr+guaaHlZtEUbWR54RNS26znzBF0OR/mYBBs+nN6p88WG8QlJp8YAzQ3Z5mZzD btGdMrmVa5Y/1eJmg5IIgRNj3j2qyxTDyHawhVV+fRTbGDZ5pyOjPqBZdQdkQ8TNpaPV PBp2laJALy2iqVbMqfOX90Sw6wU2uTuIRDfh825c/ulkBokSRe2xgS9qZx+6yZ0uR2Pt n8iai5Q5nVuXkyybKBafm+Vmk/xTWyM3Ci69PrjRHFaSuyt0ulb7NYKMY+uVPWsH5Vej CewA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530PahyRqFQI71KkiSYwaoaSGyTL8tOWsxTPOLSCjjJapGGBYIq1 vIsV6ZS32KXKaF8DtgEKc4jjacM+A2r+6ZihYsvf6w==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxzdQttWrQ4vZppnamNffYaVOLCya+6KucYiEKt1qF83StCAfZMK8SpFNULhbZ5/VZRYnPDg94b/XcMVnl0xkQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:97c5:: with SMTP id m5mr10666379ljj.321.1619390922473; Sun, 25 Apr 2021 15:48:42 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Robert Raszuk <>
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2021 00:48:31 +0200
Message-ID: <>
To: "Rayhaan Jaufeerally (IETF)" <>
Cc: "" <>, "idr@ietf. org" <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000afd27105c0d3d45e"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Idr] [GROW] BGP Looking Glass Capability
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2021 22:48:51 -0000

Hi Rayhaan,

> I guess a good starting point would be to reach out to IDR folks / authors
> of the operational message draft and get their input as to why it didn't
> progress further since that would be useful to guide any revival attempts.

Good idea. As I am co-author of this draft taking the liberty to do it
right here :)

A bit of history  - in min 2010 I wrote

Then we spoke about it, trimmed a bit and formed what we considered most
important operationally into

The draft was having good support during the IDR WG adoption and hence it
became WG doc.

Since then most of the authors left the vendor world and our influence to
implement it in significant commercial BGP code bases was no longer
sufficient. Yet vendors told we will implement it if customers ask for it.
So we are 9+ years and still I am not sure if anyone cares much about
switching phone and email channels between NOCs into more programmatic way.

Yet we do see from time to time a pop request to some form to tell peer
ascii strings like sms by BGP, pass some well known address, etc ...

I think this is the fundamental challenge in how we operate peering
relations. I have seen a lot of good automation happening in the IX world,
but when trying to establish BGP sessions today it seems still emails, xls,
word documents style ...

While it does not need to be all TLVs as listed in the draft but
I think operational message is indeed needed.