[Idr] 答复: draft-li-idr-flowspec-rpd-05.txt - WG Adoption call (10/14 to 10/28/2019)

["Aijun Wang" <[e-mail]>]

Hi, All:

 

Support the adoption.  This draft can enhance the capabilities of network
automation.  

 

Some clarifications are needed:

1.  The MED and AS-Path action can only influence the inbound traffic. For
outbound traffic, “Preference” value can be used. Should the draft include
also the “Preference” action?

2.  The referred draft
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-idr-wide-bgp-communities-05 is
inactive now. Is there any risk to solve such problem based on it?

3.  For policy distribution, will you consider other protocol such as PCEP?
Because BGP is mainly one peer-to-peer protocol, but the policy distribution
is from controller to router.

 

 

Best Regards.

 

Aijun Wang

China Telecom

 

发件人: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] 代表 Susan Hares
发送时间: 2019年10月15日 3:19
收件人: 'idr wg'
主题: [Idr] draft-li-idr-flowspec-rpd-05.txt - WG Adoption call (10/14 to
10/28/2019)

 

This begins a 2 week WG adoption call for draft-li-idr-flowspec-rpd-05.txt 

(10/14 to 10/28/2019).  You can access the draft at: 

 

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-idr-flowspec-rpd/

 

In your discussion regarding this draft consider if:

 

1)      Passing extended policy in BGP  is useful,

2)      Passing policy in wide community atom is a technical sound
mechanism,

3)      A deployment need exists for this technology. 

 

 

Susan Hares

Co-chair and shepherd