Re: [Idr] Vendor Defaults (was Re: Review of draft-ietf-large-community-06.txt)

Gert Doering <gert@space.net> Mon, 07 November 2016 16:21 UTC

Return-Path: <gert@space.net>
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 E416712969C for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Nov 2016 08:21:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 Q-_KKLzgPzsG for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Nov 2016 08:21:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mobil.space.net (mobil.space.net [IPv6:2001:608:2:81::67]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B9B612960B for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Nov 2016 08:21:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: idr@ietf.org
Received: from mobil.space.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37877604E7 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Nov 2016 17:21:00 +0100 (CET)
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
Received: from moebius4.space.net (moebius4.space.net [IPv6:2001:608:2:2::251]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BD82602A9; Mon, 7 Nov 2016 17:20:59 +0100 (CET)
Received: by moebius4.space.net (Postfix, from userid 1007) id 3BE1C45C27; Mon, 7 Nov 2016 17:20:59 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 17:20:59 +0100
From: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
To: "Jakob Heitz (jheitz)" <jheitz@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <20161107162059.GE79185@Space.Net>
References: <CAH1iCiq6jNtnkta0Bt952EQ9zOKSGt=_cCySsT5XuOKuHYO2nQ@mail.gmail.com> <86860386-9C2B-4BD5-B457-2A6DA5446CF3@cisco.com> <17E646EF-4633-423B-9AC4-B53D49C90632@gmail.com> <CA+b+ERk8NgT4RB9Hv_yrPRb2Gv2RVU9EjXUpdMc=mg0U7TeykQ@mail.gmail.com> <20161107121251.GT79185@Space.Net> <CA+b+ER=8U7kww=8KpOjSDh=XpK+O2LVmStLDf4KuG+FGjp3-UQ@mail.gmail.com> <B245D36A-DB4D-402E-87ED-3DBF31699B2B@cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="uANtsCJ0la+JAbPL"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <B245D36A-DB4D-402E-87ED-3DBF31699B2B@cisco.com>
X-NCC-RegID: de.space
User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.1 (2016-04-27)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/r2Ip-65c4E77lXuSbApAqr8X7jY>
Cc: heasley <heas@shrubbery.net>, idr wg <idr@ietf.org>, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Vendor Defaults (was Re: Review of draft-ietf-large-community-06.txt)
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 07 Nov 2016 16:21:05 -0000

Hi,

On Mon, Nov 07, 2016 at 04:14:32PM +0000, Jakob Heitz (jheitz) wrote:
> 5539:100 is used by 5539 to tell its neighbors that the route was learned in Frankfurt/DECIX.
> http://www.space.net/static/bgp_communities.html

Indeed, and sorry for the 5539:70 and 5539:130 example, these were 
obviously incorrect - the list (and our configs) say it's 5539:3070,
5539:3100 and 5539:3130 to set local-pref in our network.

But this example prominently documents why operators think that the model
"5539 defines the namespace for 5539:*" is the only thing that makes sense
- there are communities set *by* 5539, to declare "information about a 
prefix", and there are other community values sent *to* 5539 to cause some 
sort of policy effect in our network, but both have to be declared by 
5539 to be a valid reflection of our configured BGP policy.

2914:5539 would not have any meaning for us, even if it might tell 2914
"do not announce to 5539" or anything else - not our namespace.

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444           USt-IdNr.: DE813185279