Re: [Idr] draft-lapukhov-bgp-opaque-signaling

> Without a route target, any data sent will go everywhere and be stored in
> every router.
>
> You probably don't want that.
>
> This new AFI should require a route target. That means an update message
> without an RT must be dropped.
>

I do not think RTC is enough here.

The fact that you can filter messages by receiver (or have receiver push
those  filters to upstream peers) does not in any way assures that receiver
is authorized to receive such data which for generic distribution of any
content seems like a bit of a fundamental problem to me.

Besides to agree on inter-as RT schemas is an adventure on its own.

Thx,
r.

> BGP treats all updates the same.
>
> Once the floodgates are open to generic data, you might want to invent a
> precedence attribute.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jakob.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Idr [mailto:idr-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Jakob Heitz
> (jheitz)
> *Sent:* Saturday, March 12, 2016 1:12 PM
> *To:* Petr Lapukhov <petr@fb.com>; idr@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Idr] draft-lapukhov-bgp-opaque-signaling
>
>
>
> Without this problem solved, the proposal is not useful.
>
> Everybody using it must stick to the eventual solution to ensure
> interoperability.
>
> Therefore, it should be inside the scope.
>
>
>
> Actually, BGP already has a way to distinguish applicationd: AFI and SAFI.
>
>
>
> Jakob.
>
>
>
> *From:* Petr Lapukhov [mailto:petr@fb.com]
> *Sent:* Saturday, March 12, 2016 1:06 PM
> *To:* Jakob Heitz (jheitz) <jheitz@cisco.com>; idr@ietf.org
> *Subject:* RE: draft-lapukhov-bgp-opaque-signaling
>
>
>
> Hi Jakob,
>
>
>
> There is an ongoing discussion around avoiding NLRI (key) collisions. For
> now, the plan is to externally generate unique key prefix per application,
> e.g. application name, or UUID or some other globally unique
> string. Ensuring the uniqueness of those prefixes is outside the scope of
> the proposal, though - it's more of a deployment consideration.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Petr
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Idr [idr-bounces@ietf.org] on behalf of Jakob Heitz (jheitz) [
> jheitz@cisco.com]
> *Sent:* Saturday, March 12, 2016 12:26 PM
> *To:* idr@ietf.org
> *Subject:* [Idr] [WARNING : A/V UNSCANNABLE]
> draft-lapukhov-bgp-opaque-signaling
>
> I read
>
> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-lapukhov-bgp-opaque-signaling-01.txt
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.ietf.org_id_draft-2Dlapukhov-2Dbgp-2Dopaque-2Dsignaling-2D01.txt&d=CwMFAg&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=LU_vJaM_EQu1Ssm35j2xlA&m=y8paWUSIMD4YG8hfWC8k0b55e7qWYVRgGAwsXJKLMD4&s=-jEO1Jw88BI6pWUJf9es7WC0Q8Sm0XfBIhYRrWQCBHg&e=>
>
>
>
> Is this intended for any and multiple applications to use?
>
> If so, how do independent applications guarantee no duplication in NLRI?
>
> If not, what is the target application?
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Jakob.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> Idr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>
>