Re: [Idr] New ID and request for time slot

"Rajiv Asati (rajiva)" <rajiva@cisco.com> Wed, 06 February 2008 00:22 UTC

Return-Path: <idr-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-idr-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-idr-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 151FE3A6885; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 16:22:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.639
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.639 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.960, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cH4Q9wdM4uVk; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 16:22:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77B543A67EE; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 16:22:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: idr@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BA6A3A6780 for <idr@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 16:22:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id g2rNwNmEZ4Hv for <idr@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 16:22:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rtp-iport-2.cisco.com (rtp-iport-2.cisco.com [64.102.122.149]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6169C3A6886 for <idr@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 16:21:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Feb 2008 19:22:53 -0500
Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (rtp-core-2.cisco.com [64.102.124.13]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m160MqFc017203; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 19:22:52 -0500
Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m160MqMR029809; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 00:22:52 GMT
Received: from xmb-rtp-20b.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.53]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 5 Feb 2008 19:22:52 -0500
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2008 19:22:52 -0500
Message-ID: <15B86BC7352F864BB53A47B540C089B604E0BABF@xmb-rtp-20b.amer.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <47A8F56C.4080608@ca.afilias.info>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Idr] New ID and request for time slot
Thread-Index: AchoUiA3Z9aRUhm4QSyAKPineHwpWgAAs5gw
From: "Rajiv Asati (rajiva)" <rajiva@cisco.com>
To: Brian Dickson <briand@ca.afilias.info>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Feb 2008 00:22:52.0575 (UTC) FILETIME=[697412F0:01C86856]
Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=rajiva@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim1001 verified; );
Cc: idr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Idr] New ID and request for time slot
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/idr>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: idr-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: idr-bounces@ietf.org

Hi Brian,

The draft-dickson-idr-second-best-backup is not yet available for
reading. I am certainly curious about whether and how it differs from
the add-paths draft -
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-walton-bgp-add-paths-05

Cheers,
Rajiv 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: idr-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:idr-bounces@ietf.org] On 
> Behalf Of Brian Dickson
> Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 6:47 PM
> Cc: idr@ietf.org
> Subject: [Idr] New ID and request for time slot
> 
> I've put together a new draft, with the (ambitious!) goal of 
> addressing 
> a few of the outstanding BGP issues:
> - wedgies
> - persistent oscillations
> - path hunting.
> 
> I've included most of the supporting examples for the first 
> two, which 
> are clearly smaller in scope.
> 
> I'll be doing more work (between now and IETF-71) to produce example 
> cases for the path hunting problem (w.r.t. the new draft).
> My hope is this can reduce the level of induced churn caused by path 
> hunting.
> 
> I'd respectfully request a slot in Philly to present this material.
> 
> Comments are obviously welcome, as well as any pointers to tools for 
> evaluating path hunting behavior.
> 
> Obviously, adding new attributes isn't something to be done 
> lightly, but 
> if the results are compelling enough, it may be an 
> appropriate path to take.
> 
> I'd appreciate it if we can first look to see if the results are 
> compelling, before getting into whether they are compelling 
> enough. :-)
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Brian Dickson
> 
> > A new version of I-D, 
> draft-dickson-idr-second-best-backup-00.txt has 
> > been successfuly submitted by Brian Dickson and posted to the IETF 
> > repository.
> >
> > Filename:        draft-dickson-idr-second-best-backup
> > Revision:        00
> > Title:           Enhanced BGP Capabilities for Exchanging 
> Second-best 
> > and Back-up Paths
> > Creation_date:   2008-02-05
> > WG ID:           Independent Submission
> > Number_of_pages: 20
> >
> > Abstract:
> > This Internet Draft describes an enhanced way to exchange prefix
> > information, to permit multiple copies of a prefix with different
> > paths to be announced and withdrawn.
> >
> > This negotiated capability provides faster local (inter-AS) and
> > global (intra-AS) convergence, reduces path-hunting, improves route-
> > reflector behaviour, including eliminating both persistent
> > oscillations and BGP "wedgies".
> >
> > Additional prefix instances have new optional transtive BGP
> > attributes, to control path selection.
> >
> > Withdrawl of prefixes will require path attributes.
> >
> > Benefits are seen both when deployed intra-AS, and on inter-AS
> > peering.
> > Author's Note
> >
> > This Internet Draft is intended to result in this draft or a related
> > draft(s) being placed on the Standards Track for idr.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> Idr@ietf.org
> http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
> 
_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
Idr@ietf.org
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr