IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-ix-bgp-route-server-11: (with COMMENT)

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Mon, 20 June 2016 18:24 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 27DDC12D629 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 11:24:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.198, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no 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 9M5jFW_DPAfn for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 11:24:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf0-x229.google.com (mail-lf0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::229]) (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 A2B56127078 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 11:24:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf0-x229.google.com with SMTP id f6so43191431lfg.0 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 11:24:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=QkbMAu9Vl62E3usw3V2N3cAQd+AMWBgn+x0vUFVXqyE=; b=Woev9xkVgEucN3P9CrDcKdDugnpLky2d62Mm05V7PybjJ0Y9qoJijVpPH9XH/D2ku6 0tujxzlHhVPvFjS3qP6hbD/Ml1aXNmj6U+vlXpM2UNMyVmKcZueyKSTQX3QEyPvREgSa mIM9IkduAiSflmTEem7Hf/sts1ZN+T090iizRcDwK7rjIqNndGcVRHpY/9VsyL/OjQ3O cllXgy66JmKR5nAnYUuCqhidjsYSub25QrNx/s7u7o829IVvbZ+GUVO+iV5248tK+sFi 9kKXaP825dq54696f4Vdaom7vUcybeJ1ja0Fgjw94jV0ZdrZyoXaEc4GszVUeWNzps8e momw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=QkbMAu9Vl62E3usw3V2N3cAQd+AMWBgn+x0vUFVXqyE=; b=gxcXI4ov/ZE/z1tITNDaUmq53zRYHGKSudVgp7sjzRlPuO36CzI3Ts4SbAiLRFWKgF aP5MqTRWKbhLXf2T6/owAaxVozNM3iX0WIf/Grg8jP2AnMAW/SlxD1QTfMdTZx4Mbm5z nwMa8WJIL4Lr0EXdqKfFEDLPZ2VmP6kXOz83hVx1u6oy2UwP8U4FC6jbC3i203oPONbA F1FuYX9c22R7mtOKbG+n7bKIYw22jVkNo+PN9Jf2gtSzaBaU/MP6wtKGVPZV4OxSKuhx BsPJF6s/TDHY8W3DaUfCdgAywdXubB0JHS56Xwqp8ZGoeV1+cCchARWYC821ulBBkRMs DGUw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tKHv0iAMSln3WWQ49+8jobEFU0jhV+qzJeXRoWv+e3t+pZa7hdxgc711xCnYadVa177TGV8rGDc6c8G5A==
X-Received: by 10.46.5.213 with SMTP id 204mr4584973ljf.64.1466447055179; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 11:24:15 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: rraszuk@gmail.com
Received: by 10.25.21.30 with HTTP; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 11:24:14 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20160620131112.GE2950@pfrc.org>
References: <0DE7AB8E-4CFD-44C5-898F-47F48B542599@kuehlewind.net> <575F2704.3050509@foobar.org> <m237ogo5w1.wl%randy@psg.com> <CAL9jLaaCa9aUOw0HUfyrt05GTYL+yGZum1M=3_4r_E0nx4PqJg@mail.gmail.com> <A65A6088-433D-4200-B098-B2FFEB0A45CD@psg.com> <CAL9jLabgF=h9wSg4GoDoJiT76HcKK2DhpJv=ZxLws7LSs8RN3g@mail.gmail.com> <575FD94E.8030606@foobar.org> <m2inxckqr8.wl%randy@psg.com> <575FF3B9.3080501@foobar.org> <m2ziqnk8b1.wl%randy@psg.com> <20160620131112.GE2950@pfrc.org>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 20:24:14 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: Q7jIIPbdsaEWm0F_tIlQ2QDjIpI
Message-ID: <CA+b+ER=yEDkOeYch+6=Zah+N-Hmp8qwfCyw4ZyZZ6VVZ1XNAyA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114a683ece54e60535b9cffe"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/u3HoJJYC0OcQWZ2lYverfUHIW6I>
Cc: idr wg <idr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-ix-bgp-route-server-11: (with COMMENT)
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, 20 Jun 2016 18:24:21 -0000

Jeff,

I am somewhat late in chiming in on this thread, but I'm also supportive of
> making this a MUST.
>

​As discussed before I disagree. Injecting AS(es) is a simplest form of
making some paths less preferable then others. ​And per peer policy asking
RS send my paths to peers X,Y, Z with + 4 ASes, but to peer A, B, C do not
prepend as Niels points out maybe there already today.



> If you're intending to inject your AS number into the path, then you're
> acting as a standard BGP speaker, not a Route Server.
>

​To me the Route Server is a Route Reflector for EBGP sessions. It really
does not matter if you are messing with AS_PATH there or not. What actually
matters ​is that you do not set next hop to yourself there.

Cheers,
R.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email