Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-fwd-rr-00.txt

[Igor Malyushkin <[e-mail]>]

Hello all,

Agreed with Robert. I thought too I missed the adoption call and was
surprised to see the doc already adopted.

About CT parts, to me they look like a some form of advertising, not sure
they are necessary to express the problem statement at all. Not to mention
that it looks like AIGP solves the problem in general.

пт, 16 февр. 2024 г. в 19:27, Robert Raszuk <[e-mail]>:

> All,
>
> > draft-ietf-idr-bgp-fwd-rr-00.txt
>
> Also please kindly indicate why this text is posted as an IDR WG document
> as the format of the name suggests ...
>
> I do not recall any single discussion on this proposal on the IDR WG list.
>
> Are the authors, so many co-authors and a large list of contributors not
> aware about the draft naming convention not to mention BGP Route Reflection
> principles of operation ?
>
> The Ack section also seems copied from CT draft ... not too mention it
> says this:
>
> The decision to not reuse SAFI 128 and create a new address-family to
> carry these transport-routes was based on suggestion made by Richard
> Roberts and Krzysztof Szarkowicz.¶
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-fwd-rr-00#appendix-C-2>
> I think it would be simply best if you delete this doc from datatracker at
> this point.
>
> Cheers,
> Robert
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 5:24 PM Robert Raszuk <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have two comments on your draft:
>>
>> #1 - RFC4456 does not assume RRs not to be in the data plane. Quite
>> contrary when this RFC was originally written all RRs were in the
>> forwarding path as most networks did not use any form of encapsulation. Yes
>> I do recall running network which did not run MPLS nor SR :) In fact the
>> mentioned above encapsulations moved the RRs out of data path as
>> encapsulated packets did not need IP lookup.
>>
>> #2 - What you are saying in respect to CLUSTER_LIST is incorrect. The
>> entire point of CLUSTER_LIST is not to allow paths with local CLUSTER_ID to
>> enter Route Reflector in the first place. Quote from RFC4456:
>>
>>
>> *If the local CLUSTER_ID is found in the CLUSTER_LIST, the advertisement
>> received SHOULD be ignored**.*
>>
>> Best path has nothing to do with it. The augmentation to BGP best path
>> selection only aims for consistent selection not to prevent the loops.
>>
>> Conclusion: What you are describing is a route reflector
>> misconfiguration not a protocol bug.
>>
>> ** "ignored - really means dropped here.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Robert
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> From: <[e-mail]>
>> Date: Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 2:23 PM
>> Subject: I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-fwd-rr-00.txt
>> To: <[e-mail]>
>> Cc: <[e-mail]>
>>
>>
>> Internet-Draft draft-ietf-idr-bgp-fwd-rr-00.txt is now available. It is a
>> work
>> item of the Inter-Domain Routing (IDR) WG of the IETF.
>>
>>    Title:   BGP Route Reflector in Forwarding Path
>>    Authors: Kaliraj Vairavakkalai
>>             Natrajan Venkataraman
>>    Name:    draft-ietf-idr-bgp-fwd-rr-00.txt
>>    Pages:   8
>>    Dates:   2024-02-16
>>
>> Abstract:
>>
>>    The procedures in BGP Route Reflection (RR) spec [RFC4456] primarily
>>    deal with scenarios where the RR is not in forwarding path, and is
>>    reflecting BGP routes with next hop unchanged.
>>
>>    These procedures can sometimes result in traffic forwarding loops in
>>    deployments where the RR is in forwarding path, and is reflecting BGP
>>    routes with next hop set to self.
>>
>>    This document specifies approaches to minimize possiblity of such
>>    traffic forwarding loops.  One of those approaches updates path
>>    selection procedures specified in Section 9 of BGP RR.  [RFC4456]
>>
>> The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-fwd-rr/
>>
>> There is also an HTMLized version available at:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-fwd-rr-00
>>
>> Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at:
>> rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> I-D-Announce mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
>>
>> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>