Re: Last Call: NOPEER community for BGP route scope control to BCP
Curtis Villamizar <curtis@fictitious.org> Thu, 07 November 2002 22:59 UTC
Received: from trapdoor.merit.edu (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA17141 for <idr-archive@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 17:59:36 -0500 (EST)
Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) id 5FF17912D0; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 18:01:54 -0500 (EST)
Delivered-To: idr-outgoing@trapdoor.merit.edu
Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 3363E912D2; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 18:01:54 -0500 (EST)
Delivered-To: idr@trapdoor.merit.edu
Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2B34912D0 for <idr@trapdoor.merit.edu>; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 18:01:52 -0500 (EST)
Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id BD4DE5DE07; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 18:01:52 -0500 (EST)
Delivered-To: idr@merit.edu
Received: from workhorse.fictitious.org (workhorse.fictitious.org [209.150.1.230]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB2A25DDD5 for <idr@merit.edu>; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 18:01:51 -0500 (EST)
Received: from workhorse.fictitious.org (localhost.fictitious.org [127.0.0.1]) by workhorse.fictitious.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA25608; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 17:59:14 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from curtis@workhorse.fictitious.org)
Message-Id: <200211072259.RAA25608@workhorse.fictitious.org>
To: Justin Fletcher <jfletcher@proficient.net>
Cc: iesg@ietf.org, idr@merit.edu, ptomaine@shrubbery.net, Alex Zinin <zinin@psg.com>
Reply-To: curtis@fictitious.org
Subject: Re: Last Call: NOPEER community for BGP route scope control to BCP
In-reply-to: Your message of "07 Nov 2002 10:13:03 PST." <1036692784.2228.123.camel@riga>
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2002 17:59:14 -0500
From: Curtis Villamizar <curtis@fictitious.org>
Sender: owner-idr@merit.edu
Precedence: bulk
In message <1036692784.2228.123.camel@riga>, Justin Fletcher writes: > > The IESG has received a request from the Prefix Taxonomy Ongoing > > Measurement & Inter Network Experiment Working Group to consider NOPEER > > community for BGP route scope control > > <draft-ietf-ptomaine-nopeer-00.txt> as a BCP. > > > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits > > final comments on this action. Please send any comments to the > > iesg@ietf.org or ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2002-11-17. > > I believe this should be considered as an experimental rather than a > BCP. It does not document current practice and requires implementation > by router vendors before it can be adopted into practice. > > Other issues: > > The community field should be previously assigned by IANA and defined in > the document. > > There's a large motivation section, but no implementation > section (what do I do with NOPEER if receive it?) The ISP configures policy (a single statement) based on the NOPEER BGP community. What the policy does is not sufficiently specified. > The paragraph > > This approach allows an originator of a prefix to attach a commonly > defined policy to a route prefix, indicate that a route should be > re-advertised conditionally, based on the characteristics of the > inter-AS connection. > > does not define the conditions under which a route should be > re-advertised. Without such, I don't see a difference between > NOPEER and NO-ADVERTISE. The semantics are not defined. A customer sends NO-ADVERTISE. A peer sends NOPEER. I would imagine that a customer sending NOPEER would go out of the immediate AS (NOPEER and current AS as the only AS in the path is exported) but no further. If this is what is intended the draft doesn't say so. > There should at least be references to RFC1771 and RFC1997. > > I'd like a clear definition of "bilateral inter-AS peering" > early in the document. > > Best, > Justin Fletcher > Proficient Networks, Inc. I agree with your comments regarding inadequate specification of implementation. This draft has a good motivation but semantics need to be clearly defined. It is also not a BCP since it is not a current practice (unless Geoff is already doing this with his peers, which I doubt). Curtis
- Fwd: Last Call: NOPEER community for BGP route sc… Alex Zinin
- Re: Last Call: NOPEER community for BGP route sco… Justin Fletcher
- Re: Last Call: NOPEER community for BGP route sco… Curtis Villamizar
- Re: Last Call: NOPEER community for BGP route sco… Justin Fletcher