[IPFIX] discussion about exporting BGP community information in IPFIX
li zhenqiang <li_zhenqiang@hotmail.com> Mon, 22 May 2017 06:49 UTC
Return-Path: <li_zhenqiang@hotmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8521A1286B1; Sun, 21 May 2017 23:49:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.586
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.586 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD2=0.874, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=hotmail.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 IaFe-jw6KY3D; Sun, 21 May 2017 23:49:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from APC01-HK2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-oln040092255086.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.92.255.86]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C11612706D; Sun, 21 May 2017 23:49:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hotmail.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=tUrPdiCPMbbY1xMaklXLDntPCcMtM7mG63WZpOg9gA0=; b=KLE+34ho3+YpXlpaEqJUwzIog0XWU6C3BduMFwxUL0Jwsk2X2awqCvFxED4IHnY52WdJBh43RCVFpJnZlzTQn3S4BaDknZhunf0YllYUsY7xCtGQWK/44OG8aNvhx1znzrg3LRLkbLgEksDZRjZOOwo8ByPrlWSpdXP0OWyXWhOGmnjG2Ddy80ozmy73Lgh6KUwPJuzLXii6Nuh1spxqzXjpQR8SJ243IAYiz+dh/G+Zbm9SwPylBbn4UrMbuPoHGjZOZGSJ+GtGw6ewBXeBBeb1zLMzoo1ovvklKU5OWg7Z9E6fZAwYpd9jqDjSBwfnass4/uGzhsbhuS/Q385jVA==
Received: from PU1APC01FT018.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com (10.152.252.55) by PU1APC01HT135.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com (10.152.252.197) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.1075.5; Mon, 22 May 2017 06:49:52 +0000
Received: from HK2PR0601MB1361.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.152.252.59) by PU1APC01FT018.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.253.189) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1075.5 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 22 May 2017 06:49:51 +0000
Received: from HK2PR0601MB1361.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::2115:a445:9d1f:b88b]) by HK2PR0601MB1361.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::2115:a445:9d1f:b88b%14]) with mapi id 15.01.1101.019; Mon, 22 May 2017 06:49:51 +0000
From: li zhenqiang <li_zhenqiang@hotmail.com>
To: opsawg <opsawg@ietf.org>, idr <idr@ietf.org>, "ipfix@ietf.org" <ipfix@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: discussion about exporting BGP community information in IPFIX
Thread-Index: AQHS0sec79+PG+QhZkiBAviflUwRGQ==
Date: Mon, 22 May 2017 06:49:51 +0000
Message-ID: <HK2PR0601MB13617E5EA5828A10E5B3D1A6FCF80@HK2PR0601MB1361.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: ietf.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;ietf.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=hotmail.com;
x-incomingtopheadermarker: OriginalChecksum:8047A2B209D0B41D3929C5AD5A78B02155A16A3143AA106D15A6D33A1732F3CE; UpperCasedChecksum:ACEA18884C07D3750BC5AF0C97E0D7AA38D04CEA0A983E399109AA3D7DDCE0D1; SizeAsReceived:8022; Count:40
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; PU1APC01HT135; 5:Paud577amoEGtc0kWIic3JwYoaPvA/AUVsMUO6QuKAC9GD7EnblYSVpdWFRzOroHsKuhriPhq2kuDDKWh8DDKTF2VmLPqs0IlWz8WpZRxRcc/NvAi4K7/yxj77orKPKDAVv3eEkzWk0fFP9+7FNMrg==; 24:AqyULVUqDjRl+AX5hfCW+Lo0+3c6CD2Q9oQ/PFiE+CEylMyBxWQmfT5u5SBsPuyfLJ3E7qASFcuYQBclVL+gtU/aWydUbC1CBEwAi5M6tyo=; 7:3/J3P5RMKJlI8TbXwHNTlf7Nsw0dLA6YAQ6Joh4RYqS5vIKwfFIkR8Jdj6T+zLTdlJrRQU4phScTNMLX1TQc1syTXL1lEWVO3TnI6yL/JCyq92ulu1p3+06x8eL9LK1iC+AUfyNmm89I6m/CFgoBFjsglNZ0pymu7ZzhEAIGagJatx5uJVjuH+8bz97EMnF34v5BAI7hMXra9+hUl3kj2HuFO1l38OeJxMgBfqCvkYjNLFvjku/O8aJ2mNQBDX95QZOIVjfUsTSykQsIk4j/HYM2xN9ecqGQr72nPVryqE2s3bD7QfLN8LVzWuGJZis9
x-incomingheadercount: 40
x-eopattributedmessage: 0
x-forefront-antispam-report: EFV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; SFS:(7070007)(98901004); DIR:OUT; SFP:1901; SCL:1; SRVR:PU1APC01HT135; H:HK2PR0601MB1361.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en;
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: db830bac-71df-40c2-3d58-08d4a0debcc3
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(22001)(201702061074)(5061506573)(5061507331)(1603103135)(2017031320274)(2017031324274)(2017031323274)(2017031322274)(1601125374)(1603101448)(1701031045); SRVR:PU1APC01HT135;
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(444000031); SRVR:PU1APC01HT135; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:PU1APC01HT135;
x-forefront-prvs: 03152A99FF
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_HK2PR0601MB13617E5EA5828A10E5B3D1A6FCF80HK2PR0601MB1361_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: hotmail.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 22 May 2017 06:49:51.8992 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Internet
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: PU1APC01HT135
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipfix/3nlhvxd0xXGeAKssPSqvefNiBV8>
Subject: [IPFIX] discussion about exporting BGP community information in IPFIX
X-BeenThere: ipfix@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IPFIX WG discussion list <ipfix.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipfix>, <mailto:ipfix-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipfix/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipfix@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipfix-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix>, <mailto:ipfix-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 May 2017 06:49:57 -0000
Hello experts from OPSAWG, IDR and IPFIX, This mail is to follow up the discussion in the mail lists and face to face meetings. Since traffic aggregation in BGP community granularity is useful for several applications such as backbone network traffic engineering, https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-bgp-community/ introduces new information elements(IEs) in IPFIX to export the BGP community information of a specific traffic flow. At present, this draft only defines the IEs for standard community specified in RFC1997. To solve the following two significant questions raised in the previous meetings and mails, I solicit more comments and solution alternatives. Question 1: Does one IPFIX message have enough space to fit all the communities related to a specific flow? BGP community, including standard, extended, large and community container, is a path attribute of BGP distributed in an update message. Since the maximum length of one BGP message is 4096 bytes as per RFC4271 and 64K bytes for one IPFIX message as per RFC7011, the answer for this question SHOULD be yes. Howerer, some experts say the specification for BGP message lenth in RFC4271 is out of date. Its length is not limited to 4096 bytes. But I do not know the new specification. Solution alternatives for this question are also welcomed. Question 2: Do we need to cover other kinds of BGP communities, such as extended, large and community container? Based on previous discussion, large community defined in RFC8092 will be covered in the next version, since it has the same application purpose as standard community. Till now, we do not reach consensus about extended community defined in RFC4360 and community container defined in https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-wide-bgp-communities/. We usually do not use the statistical information based on extended community or community container to do traffic engineering tasks. If you think it is useful to export these two kinds of BGP community informaiton in IPFIX, please show your opinions and application use cases. Thank you all very much and best regards, ________________________________ li_zhenqiang@hotmail.com
- [IPFIX] discussion about exporting BGP community … li zhenqiang
- Re: [IPFIX] [Idr] discussion about exporting BGP … li zhenqiang
- Re: [IPFIX] [Idr] discussion about exporting BGP … PJ Aitken
- Re: [IPFIX] [Idr] discussion about exporting BGP … li zhenqiang
- Re: [IPFIX] [Idr] discussion about exporting BGP … Stewart Bryant
- Re: [IPFIX] [Idr] discussion about exporting BGP … lizhenqiang@chinamobile.com
- Re: [IPFIX] [Idr] discussion about exporting BGP … li zhenqiang