IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] draft-litkowski-idr-flowspec-interfaceset => NLRI vs EXTCT (part 2)

"Juan Alcaide (jalcaide)" <jalcaide@cisco.com> Mon, 31 July 2017 22:55 UTC

Return-Path: <jalcaide@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F907129ADD for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 15:55:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.523
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.523 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zkN8LFl_XzNf for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 15:55:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6767C129B4C for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 15:55:37 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1520; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1501541737; x=1502751337; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=f8lruFGfHFpHW5DDKtGn/5A4kHdyrjThf9RR6Jf5Fbw=; b=lrwVH53jB2B1er4KY4dQd9lvVYvsZw9LsEPfKJ9gEg/6kUEgMoMsZAJq h2pdCEriFcxxv0xvIsaLpvPvvKWWXKn+soqKrQzpP25NkoV2tL8neFWUX eAsr9isu8m2o15c/emQZxHmNe5kK+T2Uvcve/Z8BQyBMGvXYXsaAuef2g A=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.41,304,1498521600"; d="scan'208";a="274834706"
Received: from rcdn-core-2.cisco.com ([173.37.93.153]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 31 Jul 2017 22:55:36 +0000
Received: from [10.82.174.66] ([10.82.174.66]) (authenticated bits=0) by rcdn-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v6VMtYk4005349 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 31 Jul 2017 22:55:35 GMT
To: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>, "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
Cc: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>, idr wg <idr@ietf.org>
References: <9fa67eb0-8f99-a46f-aff1-d42a279ab833@cisco.com> <CA+b+ERmaARaPLQv-g58WGNJCDcKN3gdf-F9wnCwusw+jwX7paw@mail.gmail.com> <8dd3e766b58944a3b176fc743e478137@XCH-ALN-014.cisco.com> <CA+b+ERnDHgk6gVi3K1+yAbRaXoft2+xqNig=pTbgRsWRC98-zA@mail.gmail.com> <dd8e0cb4-56d3-524c-9f68-296e8457fcc9@cisco.com> <CA+b+ERmG=EQxJBuMaTD+oDdwcwZ0hCCjEsjNqD_A_jXYLgnw2Q@mail.gmail.com> <e8e834ec-5074-7d35-a06c-5837f2f39e12@cisco.com> <CA+b+ERkCfiEa=RfDaxkOz3Si-qp9axKcgDycW1+GqfKvTcsePw@mail.gmail.com> <D5A09F0B.BA519%acee@cisco.com> <20170731194409.GY24942@pfrc.org>
From: "Juan Alcaide (jalcaide)" <jalcaide@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <e3da7228-3161-0316-ac83-8fc42204d42f@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2017 00:55:33 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20170731194409.GY24942@pfrc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-Authenticated-User: jalcaide
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/qT7gp62BIaEKy1UrVIOzWC-51_w>
Subject: Re: [Idr] draft-litkowski-idr-flowspec-interfaceset => NLRI vs EXTCT (part 2)
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 22:55:39 -0000

My 2c on top of that:

A policy engine able to filter and modify parts of the NLRI (group-id) 
is not something trivial. It's not in any AF. We would have to rethink 
how to do something as trivial as  a route-refresh

-J


On 7/31/2017 9:44 PM, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
> Acee,
>
> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 12:02:41PM +0000, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
>> What was the reason for not making the interface-group part a new component type in the NLRI? It seems that making it just another Flow Spec match condition would  handle all these situations naturally.
>>
>>   I remember that this was discussed but don’t recall whether it was backward compatibility or that the semantics of interface group-id was a better fit for an extended community.
> A few motivations:
> - Unknown components in the filter cannot match.
> - The match elements in the filter (NLRI) might be as-transitive, but policy
>    engines don't interact with such filters transitively very well in
>    implementations we're familiar with.  However, pretty much everything can
>    manipulate extended communities.
>
> The first consideration is partially about incremental deployment.  You
> either have the choice of shipping a filter across your network that may be
> selectively restrictive per the intent of the group-id or completely
> ignored.
>
> The best answer, of course, is consistent deployment of the updated feature.
> However, this is the course we'd chosen as part of the second consideration.
>
> -- Jeff

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email