Re: [Lsvr] Adoption of draft-ymbk-lsvr-l3dl-(signing|ulpc)

Randy Bush <> Thu, 07 May 2020 19:16 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF4B33A09F6 for <>; Thu, 7 May 2020 12:16:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 94bXEn6BCdF9 for <>; Thu, 7 May 2020 12:16:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3C3C3A09F4 for <>; Thu, 7 May 2020 12:16:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([] by with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <>) id 1jWm0f-0004vG-A4; Thu, 07 May 2020 19:16:41 +0000
Date: Thu, 07 May 2020 12:16:40 -0700
Message-ID: <>
From: Randy Bush <>
To: Warren Kumari <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/26.3 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Lsvr] Adoption of draft-ymbk-lsvr-l3dl-(signing|ulpc)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Link State Vector Routing <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 May 2020 19:16:46 -0000

thanks for the support

> I *do* think that the last paragraph in Security Considerations of
> ulpc should remain as is though,...


> "Any keying material in the PDU SHOULD BE salted ad hashed." - "and".


> A: I suspect that there are missing attributes that should be added,
> but I cannot think of any critical ones.

i admit to guilt-free obsessive minimalism

> B: I'm not 100% sure what the relationship is between this and the IDR
> BGP AutoConf work is - this looks like it provides much of the
> building blocks that the IDR work might use, but where is the line
> between them?

ships in the night

but i agree that this is useful as an example in the idr-dt.  fwiw, i
have queued homework over there.

> C: It feels like more text is needed around "If a peering address has
> been announced as a loopback, a two or three (one or both ends could
> be loopbacks) hop
>    BGP session will be established. " -- how do I know it is announced
> as a loopback? How do I know what route to install to reach the
> loopback? etc.

l3dl 13.2 tells you it is a loopback

13.2.  Encapsulaion Flags

   The Encapsulation Flags are a sequence of bit fields as follows:

    0           1            2            3            4  ...       7
   |  Ann/With  |   Primary  | Under/Over |  Loopback  | Reserved ..|

so how about

   For each BGP peering on a link here MUST be one agreed encapsulation,
   and the addresses used MUST be in the corresponding L3DP IPv4/IPv6
   Announcement PDUs.  If a peering address has been announced as a
   loopback, i.e. MUST BE flagged as such in the L3DL Encapsulation PDU,
   a two or three hop BGP session will be established.  Otherwise a
   direct one hop session is used.

needs 2119 language MUST HAVE BEEN :)