Re: [v6ops] New version of Design Guidelines draft
Rob Shakir <rjs@rob.sh> Thu, 08 November 2012 20:56 UTC
Return-Path: <rjs@rob.sh>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFD4D21F89E5 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 12:56:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XDU4iGhlX-5D for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 12:56:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cappuccino.rob.sh (cappuccino.rob.sh [IPv6:2001:b98:201:101::10:cafe]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4117821F89F5 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 12:56:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rjs by cappuccino.rob.sh with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <rjs@rob.sh>) id 1TWZ6h-0006fg-J9; Thu, 08 Nov 2012 20:53:47 +0000
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2012 20:53:47 +0000
From: Rob Shakir <rjs@rob.sh>
To: Philip Matthews <philip_matthews@magma.ca>
Message-ID: <20121108205347.GA25012@cappuccino.rob.sh>
References: <3AB4D8A4-B4A4-422B-8388-BFFA7D901FEC@magma.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3AB4D8A4-B4A4-422B-8388-BFFA7D901FEC@magma.ca>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org list" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] New version of Design Guidelines draft
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2012 20:56:29 -0000
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 02:28:49PM -0400, Philip Matthews wrote: > Folks: > > I have just posted a new version (-01) of the Design Guidelines draft: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-matthews-v6ops-design-guidelines/ OR > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-matthews-v6ops-design-guidelines-01 Hi Philip, Apologies, I did not notice this to comment at the mic in the meeting. In the draft on the subject of eBGP sessions, you state: However, there are three main concerns with option (a). First, on most existing implementations, adding or removing an address family to an established BGP session will cause the router to tear down and re-establish the session. Thus adding the IPv6 family to an existing session carrying just IPv4 routes will disrupt the session, and the eventual removal of IPv4 from the dual IPv4/IPv6 session will also disrupt the session. This disruption problem will persist until something similar to [I-D.ietf-idr-dynamic-cap] is widely deployed. One should note that dynamic-cap is not the only option for not disrupting a session between two devices by adding new capabilities to it. For IPv4/IPv6/VPNv4/VPNv6, running multi-session [0] will allow separate sessions to be utilised for each <AFI,SAFI>. In this case, the transport is still over the single underlying IP transport (whether it be IPv4, or IPv6). This is notable because: A) It allows adding new AFIs to an adjacency in a non-disruptive way. B) It is already implemented in at least one major shipping implementation - where dynamic-cap is not implemented in any that I know of. C) It provides some fault isolation between UPDATE and other BGP errors in {IP,VPN}v4/{IP,VPN}v6 AFIs. D) It retains the management simplicity of having a single identifier for a remote peer, whilst having some of the advantages of separate sessions. Of course it does not address the other concerns around different transport planes that are contained in the same section, but it is perhaps worth nothing in your draft. Thanks, r. [0]: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-multisession-07
- Re: [v6ops] New version of Design Guidelines draft Rob Shakir
- [v6ops] New version of Design Guidelines draft Philip Matthews
- Re: [v6ops] New version of Design Guidelines draft Philip Matthews
- Re: [v6ops] New version of Design Guidelines draft Ivan Pepelnjak
- Re: [v6ops] New version of Design Guidelines draft KK Chittimaneni
- Re: [v6ops] New version of Design Guidelines draft Philip Matthews