IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Sidrops] New Version Notification for draft-sriram-sidrops-drop-invalid-policy-00.txt

Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org> Fri, 16 March 2018 13:41 UTC

Return-Path: <jhaas@slice.pfrc.org>
X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B4DD128961; Fri, 16 Mar 2018 06:41:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.911
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.911 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 AehhoYIJpThm; Fri, 16 Mar 2018 06:41:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from slice.pfrc.org (slice.pfrc.org [67.207.130.108]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72F5E126CD8; Fri, 16 Mar 2018 06:41:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by slice.pfrc.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 001571E3FE; Fri, 16 Mar 2018 09:41:03 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2018 09:41:03 -0400
From: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>
To: Job Snijders <job@instituut.net>
Cc: "Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed)" <kotikalapudi.sriram@nist.gov>, "sidrops-chairs@ietf.org" <sidrops-chairs@ietf.org>, "sidrops@ietf.org" <sidrops@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20180316134103.GF6209@pfrc.org>
References: <152029076512.12908.14537578849320525718.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <BYAPR09MB2773819AB3961189CDA9B4D784D90@BYAPR09MB2773.namprd09.prod.outlook.com> <20180315233612.GE6209@pfrc.org> <20180316000157.GC2536@vurt.meerval.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180316000157.GC2536@vurt.meerval.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidrops/H6xASsW7qahG12VlLpvYCItbXZE>
Subject: Re: [Sidrops] New Version Notification for draft-sriram-sidrops-drop-invalid-policy-00.txt
X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG <sidrops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sidrops>, <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sidrops/>
List-Post: <mailto:sidrops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops>, <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2018 13:41:03 -0000

On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 12:01:57AM +0000, Job Snijders wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 07:36:12PM -0400, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
> > RFC 4271, Section 9.1:
> > 
> > : The function that calculates the degree of preference for a given
> > : route SHALL NOT use any of the following as its inputs: the existence
> > : of other routes, the non-existence of other routes, or the path
> > : attributes of other routes.
> > 
> > I appreciate what you're trying to do here.  However, my strong advice
> > is DON'T.
> 
> I'd appreciate if you can elaborate more on your advice (perhaps from a
> protocol architecture perspective). In quite some BGP implementations
> the concept of "Conditional advertisements" is considered a feature,
> which is seemingly at odds with RFC 4271 section 9.1.

Conditional advertisement (insertion into the adj-ribs-out) is very
different than impacting the route selection of loc-rib itself.  Hopefully
this clarifies the issue.

-- Jeff

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email