Re: [Idr] IETF LC for IDR-ish document <draft-ietf-grow-bgp-reject-05.txt> (Default EBGP Route Propagation Behavior Without Policies) to Proposed Standard

[Joe Provo <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 03:26:11PM -0400, Warren Kumari wrote:
[snip]
> Empty policy is fine -- I have a number of sessions where I
> intentionally have no policy. What I don't want to have happen is
> *accidental* sessions without policy -- because, Murphy's law says
> that that will happen wherever it is most likely to hurt / just as I
> get onto a plane / right before a RIPE / NANOG meeting, so all my
> closest friends can point and jeer.
 
While I don't disagree, and this is INTER-domain Routing WG, I 
feel it would be remiss to not mention the applicability in the
datacenterBGP world. Fail-close drastically simplifies the deploy
and staging scenario, allowing different teams to be loosely
coupled and not require lockstep. 

I also like this in the generally-overlooked area of deprovisioning
for all applications: remove the call to policy and in one whack
the device is no longer propagating to your mesh.


-- 
Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header.
Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling