IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] WGLC for draft-ietf-idr-bgp-optimal-route-reflection-14

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Mon, 09 October 2017 21:20 UTC

Return-Path: <rraszuk@gmail.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 3A07F133049 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Oct 2017 14:20:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.398
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.398 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 yNfuctGO4IMJ for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Oct 2017 14:20:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x22e.google.com (mail-wm0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3ACE813430D for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Oct 2017 14:20:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id u138so27049924wmu.4 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 09 Oct 2017 14:20:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=1hW3r2Kw4hn0gZHrRCNskqJjDu2ZXKuZEveYCRoJHV4=; b=HvQ5dM/k8ROZhmtZux5X0owI/BlgSWReXq9snXDVHdWEqcTjH5Uy3OyajYN5WQsYM2 pSyQrgMz1ykcAboAJRWb63eODeRnwxQOv8au3ilzNXadDl7nJfL+bYGAJzfE+kP+jlKA q5g5dJH4eZVxVK6hDNjuH/BYxiCzGvhtbsqHwrbmafwy8v08mc1mrqPSYjpS80JMdoD+ nEkyI3CE98Rh6nVdXGNCI4mmqWP9PAh9FmzGTfznh67OKSOlP96YzjmckrNTKDzcwzHq ZdvvfianbD7LjdX7xh/HQ1EPp38ougQ46phI2MqgILxfD0wNa0fP2c7B6teYjF+8TosR 7/Lg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=1hW3r2Kw4hn0gZHrRCNskqJjDu2ZXKuZEveYCRoJHV4=; b=bfIuMvRYhH76QU9nr810cwEJa2+2Micci0aZc46qcVS69qf453QR1ib50OeKppmlKB VEki86LiYmmkFdaas0MjR5rNEUyZalUoVkpOHCvXduBvcbXpmoFlMuK/2huyGZsr4MXX fFtbVr6AdXnpA91qHFG3XnZrx5fqStBhvCxllL+jTkOjQT4Aj4hgzzpyeymYzsa3VjK6 bmBm7+HRwkmO9InMMDIunKSjJ9lF59WPcKZV8LADHn4F+uHFALuEj7lHmGJe9ZyMqomM HyQ+2+HiD8JnBzXxEQXbWI+qUTsdm3Qzf5KwHvYpnehMc/19Tz8sZZAR12ysKHHRuJuI PN8A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMCzsaVUY1aoBGA7aDJ+h6hqPFh9bqyWgVx4tnKSmKvAMN31Xw1jZSa5 GkpZ1JvbIiKJL5wW9udXqGdyJ2VkGZ0Lue9kqJ9R/g==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QAQSzQ49PggqnarJOclgS/FcKiRjBmI4SLpMAXLeWozrzbiE5CSWpdTqt+gyDhYJknKDFQwlRUvd6EOcaXmEos=
X-Received: by 10.28.95.10 with SMTP id t10mr8904007wmb.72.1507584003588; Mon, 09 Oct 2017 14:20:03 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: rraszuk@gmail.com
Received: by 10.28.146.135 with HTTP; Mon, 9 Oct 2017 14:20:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <59DBE72C.1060807@foobar.org>
References: <1F4BD63B-3273-469E-A3C6-4365B56724EA@juniper.net> <20171009081140.qram6b2ubl4y3isj@hanna.meerval.net> <CA+b+ERmVAA8eG3cm8++osKS4OmxiBZ6svhNPj8wC7gnQXWWYdg@mail.gmail.com> <20171009152051.GH34236@Vurt.local> <CA+b+ERnTAxra-G8xbtFAoovyCwpOySAuJx52vG3p5g7AdODK2Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAF3K5KtpvYkJM6U_Cw3pbCiMgQvwJOFdMoRGuzGMQFYHA8VLSA@mail.gmail.com> <CA+b+ER=xuh9vD7ksPUY-+WQnfduiQF=gL3=wMxK+p9rCO4s0_w@mail.gmail.com> <6062f554aa904352bc81c80040229d34@XCH-ALN-014.cisco.com> <CA+b+ER==6AKBO6BrcF__jNYmgJWbqjuTX=t213n6S_x8T=Mahg@mail.gmail.com> <59DBE72C.1060807@foobar.org>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2017 23:20:02 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: SFDevHU9YBvpV78NEG_T8zJloHM
Message-ID: <CA+b+ERktjEd4YbjnzbeRkWrq0p2oDhczgGafax+8VxVN1tmeAg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
Cc: idr wg <idr@ietf.org>, "ytti@ntt.net" <ytti@ntt.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1148fb0a00c867055b23c107"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/tI1bN4DSOkZ9kqDvfQZAR81ZSgQ>
Subject: Re: [Idr] WGLC for draft-ietf-idr-bgp-optimal-route-reflection-14
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, 09 Oct 2017 21:20:17 -0000

Nick,

We are talking about single client ...

Thx,
R.




On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 11:16 PM, Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> wrote:

> Robert Raszuk wrote:
> > So when you run (regular or ORR) best path on 1.1.1.1/24
> > <http://1.1.1.1/24> you should have all three metrics 90, 100, 110 there
> > to pick the best path. If next hop is not in IGP with or without
> > recursion such path is invalid so we should not worry about it here.
>
> correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you're understanding what
> Jakob is saying.
>
> When you have multiple orr clients (BGP1 and BGP2 in Jakob's example),
> their IGP view of the next-next-hops might be different from each other.
>  This might happen if the NH address was anycasted in the IGP, for
> example, causing the NNH to be resolved different on different bgp clients.
>
> In this situation, the behaviour of the ORR client is not defined
> clearly in the spec.  Because of the ambiguity, some implementations
> appear to have steered clear of handling recursion because it can cause
> non deterministic resolution problems.
>
> Nick
>
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> Idr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email