Opsdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext-06

Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> Wed, 09 May 2018 06:45 UTC

Return-Path: <joelja@bogus.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05FFC12EB28; Tue, 8 May 2018 23:45:34 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
To: ops-dir@ietf.org
Cc: idr@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext.all@ietf.org
Subject: Opsdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext-06
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.80.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <152584833398.2904.14504730626460815575@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 08 May 2018 23:45:34 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/L8qdpY2JhxW6PCZtYLxI2VwRKXk>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 May 2018 06:45:34 -0000

Reviewer: Joel Jaeggli
Review result: Has Nits

I have performed a requested early review on the behalf of the operations
directorate of the current draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext-06.
Generally I think this document is good, I won't say ready, as this review is
intended as an early review not a final one.

Some nits

1-
introduction

   This way, all BGP speakers (specifically the route-reflectors) obtain
   Link-State information from all IGP areas (and from other ASes from
   EBGP peers).

* BGP speakers are agnostic about the source of the information beyond that it
was exported with certain properties from the rib of it’s neighbor.

2 -
   An external component (e.g., a controller) then can
   collect SR information in the "northbound" direction across IGP areas
   or ASes and construct the end-to-end path (with its associated SIDs)
   that need to be applied to an incoming packet to achieve the desired
   end-to-end forwarding.

* Unqualified use of the term northbound I find generally problematic,
particularly in the case of a route reflector. Previously RFC 7752 manged to
use the term in the title and then never again within the text.

3-

2.3.3.  Source Router Identifier (Source Router-ID) TLV

   The Source Router-ID TLV contains the IPv4 or IPv6 Router-ID of the
   originator of the Prefix.  For IS-IS protocol this is as defined in
   [RFC7794].  The Source Router-ID TLV may be used to carry the OSPF
   Router-ID of the prefix originator.

   The Source Router-ID TLV has the following format:

    0                   1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Type               |            Length             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   //                  IPv4/IPv6 Address (Router-ID)              //
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   where:

      Type: TBD, see Section 4.

      Length: 4 or 16.

      IPv4/IPv6 Address: 4 octet IPv4 address or 16 octet IPv6 address.

   The semantic of the Source Router-ID TLV is defined in [RFC7794].

* While RFC7794 Router-IDs are in fact IP addresses. OSPF Router-IDs are not
even if they happen to look like them, this is particularly germain with ospfv3
but it’s worth making the distinction.

4 -
5.1.1.  Operations

   Existing BGP and BGP-LS operational procedures apply.  No additional
   operation procedures are defined in this document.

* An informative or normative reference (probably to 7752 especially fault
mangement) is probably required.