IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-bgp-extended-messages-12 WG LC (5/24 to 6/7)

"Keyur Patel (keyupate)" <keyupate@cisco.com> Wed, 25 May 2016 15:36 UTC

Return-Path: <keyupate@cisco.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 12BE812D7A1 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 May 2016 08:36:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.946
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.946 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 6Jl1PZ90dngV for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 May 2016 08:36:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.86.75]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 954F412D7C3 for <idr@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 May 2016 08:35:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=19711; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1464190503; x=1465400103; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=9tAOCNk/7IDtH9AM1V+wWl7TdRwyj1lbltBWbiJ1NM8=; b=mVDwgrsh9QEZjShwqrAynFNVSW39NpunEh8wfhvIVDLC/gteX31AxUoi KWwz26aynwmt8p2ux643mn01ztMh3tzoUxv3FA+m9kwlSc2jEmqqm5SHP DTDD8WQOdFKtdnfgCby88EnHoF9KBnU1H7sVfqSoyM+mRor5i8sl6pD94 4=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0BBAgARxUVX/4cNJK1cgmxLgVMGrgKGdoR5AQ2Bd4YRAhyBJDgUAQEBAQEBAWUnhEMBAQEEI1YQAgEGAhEDAQIoAwICAh8RFAkIAgQBDQWIFQMXlSadHY02DYQpAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBHIYng0mBA4JDghyCYYJZBZM3hE0zAYwmgXmBaY0zhjOBMYdnAR4BAUKDbW6JCH8BAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,364,1459814400"; d="scan'208,217";a="108093430"
Received: from alln-core-2.cisco.com ([173.36.13.135]) by rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 25 May 2016 15:35:02 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com (xch-rtp-012.cisco.com [64.101.220.152]) by alln-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u4PFZ2Hp014983 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 25 May 2016 15:35:02 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-017.cisco.com (64.101.220.157) by XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com (64.101.220.152) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Wed, 25 May 2016 11:35:00 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-017.cisco.com ([64.101.220.157]) by XCH-RTP-017.cisco.com ([64.101.220.157]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Wed, 25 May 2016 11:35:01 -0400
From: "Keyur Patel (keyupate)" <keyupate@cisco.com>
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Thread-Topic: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-bgp-extended-messages-12 WG LC (5/24 to 6/7)
Thread-Index: AQHRtpsA+lObACwrYUK+SmAOAYLpXA==
Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 15:35:01 +0000
Message-ID: <D36B1406.4080E%keyupate@cisco.com>
References: <037f01d1b5fc$bfb596f0$3f20c4d0$@ndzh.com> <13146_1464170675_574578B3_13146_4888_1_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A0F8CD227@OPEXCLILM21.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <CA+b+ERmdpCmCsP-5_NsLH6pbay4zaXMpjGJP2S3z8gfAAXZR8A@mail.gmail.com> <D36B06A7.6257D%acee@cisco.com> <CA+b+ERkioULCYg_HQK9qqN+wjiapTZxK7nHWLGaq_=8wfxajsA@mail.gmail.com> <D36B2E2D.625D3%acee@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <D36B2E2D.625D3%acee@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.4.9.150325
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.24.6.18]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D36B14064080Ekeyupateciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/y-72gzNqLtzT4pNtrgCwMJydO-o>
Cc: Bruno Decraene <bruno.decraene@orange.com>, Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>, "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-bgp-extended-messages-12 WG LC (5/24 to 6/7)
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: Wed, 25 May 2016 15:36:27 -0000

Comments inlined #Keyur

From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com<mailto:acee@cisco.com>>
Date: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 at 7:29 AM
To: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net<mailto:robert@raszuk.net>>
Cc: Bruno Decraene <bruno.decraene@orange.com<mailto:bruno.decraene@orange.com>>, Keyur Patel <keyupate@cisco.com<mailto:keyupate@cisco.com>>, "idr@ietf.org<mailto:idr@ietf.org>" <idr@ietf.org<mailto:idr@ietf.org>>, Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com<mailto:shares@ndzh.com>>
Subject: Re: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-bgp-extended-messages-12 WG LC (5/24 to 6/7)

Hi Robert,

From: <rraszuk@gmail.com<mailto:rraszuk@gmail.com>> on behalf of Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net<mailto:robert@raszuk.net>>
Date: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 at 7:50 AM
To: Acee Lindem <acee@cisco.com<mailto:acee@cisco.com>>
Cc: Bruno Decraene <bruno.decraene@orange.com<mailto:bruno.decraene@orange.com>>, "Keyur Patel (keyupate)" <keyupate@cisco.com<mailto:keyupate@cisco.com>>, IDR List <idr@ietf.org<mailto:idr@ietf.org>>, Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com<mailto:shares@ndzh.com>>
Subject: Re: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-bgp-extended-messages-12 WG LC (5/24 to 6/7)

Hi AC,

Yes indeed - you are right - I was a bit hit with "relay" term :).

And since this entire work started with the assumption that packing per NLRI will be broken anyway one could expect this to be always the case.

So it does look like a bit of show stopper to me unless we enforce that if there is at least one BGP peer on given BGP speaker not supporting 64K all sessions will get reset to 4K max. Ugly but not sure what other options can address it. Perhaps authors will come up with better one.

Since this is likely to be an extremely rare occurrence, I’d simply not advertise the NLRI to a peer not supporting extended messages and log the error.

Additionally, we could discourage the generation of a single NLRI exceeding 4K.

#Keyur: Yep. I agree. :)

Regards,
Keyur


Thanks,
Acee



Thx,
R.



On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Acee Lindem (acee) <acee@cisco.com<mailto:acee@cisco.com>> wrote:


From: Idr <idr-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:idr-bounces@ietf.org>> on behalf of Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net<mailto:robert@raszuk.net>>
Date: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 at 6:34 AM
To: Bruno Decraene <bruno.decraene@orange.com<mailto:bruno.decraene@orange.com>>
Cc: "Keyur Patel (keyupate)" <keyupate@cisco.com<mailto:keyupate@cisco.com>>, IDR List <idr@ietf.org<mailto:idr@ietf.org>>, Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com<mailto:shares@ndzh.com>>
Subject: Re: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-bgp-extended-messages-12 WG LC (5/24 to 6/7)

Hi Bruno,


Suppose that I receive an extended BGP message (e.g. update) that I can’t relay

to some peers because they don’t support such extension, while I “should” have

relayed it.

​BGP does not "relay" messages .. do you have some new BGP draft in mind which would work as BGP "repeater" ? While I recall we discussed it in the past that work were pretty much abandoned :)

BGP generates messages at each BGP speaker so the above seems like non issue to me for this draft.

A non-issue unless the size of a single NLRI and its attributes exceeds 4K.
Thanks,
Acee



​
​Best,
R.

For the draft itself: Support ​from me.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email