IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Sidrops] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-sidrops-ov-egress-01

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Wed, 18 March 2020 01:34 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.com>
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 3B9E73A0DDF; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 18:34:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 9IqeIH2oBjYt; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 18:34:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8916F3A0DDB; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 18:34:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.rg.net) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1jENas-00074M-8n; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 01:34:02 +0000
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 18:34:01 -0700
Message-ID: <m2y2ry78fq.wl-randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
Cc: gen-art@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, draft-ietf-sidrops-ov-egress.all@ietf.org, sidrops@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <158411258778.3418.757369789772046254@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <158411258778.3418.757369789772046254@ietfa.amsl.com>
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidrops/yPyxZKA1CqW0SKTDv6daF152y_E>
Subject: Re: [Sidrops] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-sidrops-ov-egress-01
X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Wed, 18 Mar 2020 01:34:06 -0000

thanks for review robert,

> This sentence slowed me down when reading:
> 
>    As the origin AS may be modified by outbound policy, policy semantics
>    based on RPKI Origin Validation state MUST be able to be applied
>    separately on distribution into BGP and on egress.
> 
> I suggest something like:
> 
>   As the origin AS may be modified by outbound policy, a BGP speaker 
>   MUST be able to apply policy semantics based on RPKI Origin Validation 
>   state separately on distribution into BGP and on egress.

am i correct that you point is to make clear that this applies to the BGP
speaker?

i need to think.  clearly, the speaker will be applying the policy.  but
is it not the op configuring the policy which is deciding?  or is it
that you really want to MUST the application, a la

   As the origin AS may be modified by outbound policy, a BGP speaker
   MUST apply ROV policy semantics using the My Autonomous System
   number in the BGP OPEN message (see RFC 4271 section 4.2) issued to
   the peer to which the UPDATE is being sent.

randy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email