Re: [Idr] One Administrative Domain using BGP (Fwd: I-D Action: draft-uttaro-idr-bgp-oad-00.txt)

[Alvaro Retana <[e-mail]>]

On March 13, 2023 at 12:09:26 PM, Robert Raszuk wrote:


Robert:

Hi!

> Today a lot of implementations already support features like
> next-hop-unchanged on EBGP, or AIGP attribute etc ...
>
> Would it not be just much cleaner to enumerate explicitly those features on
> today's EBGP sessions between ASNs under the same administrative domains ?
>
> Practical aspect is that while you can define the expected behaviour of OAD
> session today - but tomorrow we will likely introduce more BGP protocols
> extensions which will not going to be reflected in this OAD document. So it is
> going to be really hard to keep track on what sides really intend to do when
> declaring on their edge OAD session type.
>
> IMHO explicitly enabling exceptions for plane EBGP sessions will be far more
> practical approach.

The intent is for the EBGP-OAD session to "allow all" so that as new extensions are introduces we don't need to update the document. ;-)  For specific applications an operator may want to only propagate certain extensions -- that can be controlled through policy. 

Any exceptions or different behavior to be called out in the draft should be for specific items only.


There are possibly multiple ways to obtain the same (or similar) outcome. :-)

Thanks!

Alvaro.