IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] 2 Week WG last call for draft-ietf-idr-bgp-enhanced-route-refresh

Thomas Mangin <thomas.mangin@exa-networks.co.uk> Tue, 24 September 2013 20:59 UTC

Return-Path: <thomas.mangin@exa-networks.co.uk>
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 5CBCD21F9CF5; Tue, 24 Sep 2013 13:59:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.193
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.193 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.406, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id u4+JzTed+-+h; Tue, 24 Sep 2013 13:58:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-9.mail.exa.net.uk (out-9.mail.exa.net.uk [82.219.4.137]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 246CA21F9D68; Tue, 24 Sep 2013 13:58:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-4.mail.exa.net.uk (smtp-4.mail.exa.net.uk [82.219.5.4]) by out-9.mail.exa.net.uk (ExaSMTPD) with ESMTP id 84CF5A02B8; Tue, 24 Sep 2013 21:58:36 +0100 (BST)
Received: from ptr-34.212.219.82.rev.exa.net.uk (ptr-34.212.219.82.rev.exa.net.uk [82.219.212.34]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: thomas@mangin.com) by smtp-4.mail.exa.net.uk (ExaSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 4049A4005D; Tue, 24 Sep 2013 21:58:36 +0100 (BST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\))
From: Thomas Mangin <thomas.mangin@exa-networks.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <0BBBFCA1-76B4-4542-9622-207802914D6C@juniper.net>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 21:58:35 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <45287F59-DBD8-4D1E-B309-FC075CA16FDA@exa-networks.co.uk>
References: <02b901ceb0b7$e1d74b90$a585e2b0$@ndzh.com> <15455006-B087-43D4-9D4D-6F7E7B45D545@juniper.net> <0DCADEB3-3DE9-4B3D-B78D-091C59E601FA@exa-networks.co.uk> <0BBBFCA1-76B4-4542-9622-207802914D6C@juniper.net>
To: jgs@juniper.net
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510)
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.97.8 at out-2-2.mail.exa.net.uk
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Cc: "Keyur Patel (keyupate)" <keyupate@cisco.com>, idr wg <idr@ietf.org>, idr-bounces@ietf.org, Hares Susan <shares@ndzh.com>
Subject: Re: [Idr] 2 Week WG last call for draft-ietf-idr-bgp-enhanced-route-refresh
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 20:59:02 -0000

> Second, I don't see how this has "the side effect to remove the need for a timer", since one possible error case is where the sending side simply forgets to send the EoRR,

I assumed that vendor would never ship code as broken as that, but I will concede this point and agree with you :-)

> It occurs to me that one bit of clarification that might help is to state that all updates received during the route refresh are to be processed as normal, except as explicitly noted in the spec, and that the EoRR's only uses are to signal that stale routes can be flushed, and optionally any "sanity" steps (locally defined) can be taken.


Sounds good to me.

Thomas

v2.37.1 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status