Re: [v6ops] BGP Identifier

Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> Fri, 14 February 2014 20:13 UTC

Return-Path: <sander@steffann.nl>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D2001A03D8; Fri, 14 Feb 2014 12:13:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.194
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.194 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_NL=0.55, HOST_EQ_NL=1.545, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 GcW80BdPHxAF; Fri, 14 Feb 2014 12:13:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.sintact.nl (mail.sintact.nl [IPv6:2001:9e0:803::6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B3471A03CD; Fri, 14 Feb 2014 12:13:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id B493A37; Fri, 14 Feb 2014 21:13:21 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.sintact.nl
Received: from mail.sintact.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.sintact.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZDOeUIUaTBPJ; Fri, 14 Feb 2014 21:13:19 +0100 (CET)
Received: from macpro.10ww.steffann.nl (macpro.10ww.steffann.nl [37.77.56.75]) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 69A4134; Fri, 14 Feb 2014 21:13:19 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
From: Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
In-Reply-To: <m2wqgyjifd.wl%randy@psg.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 21:13:18 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <B4D8E670-3823-468F-AA41-FE14754F168C@steffann.nl>
References: <12AA6714-4BBE-4ACE-8191-AA107D04FBF4@cisco.com> <m2wqgyjifd.wl%randy@psg.com>
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/92OkiGElGpzEhB5Rltdl4o_EN0w
Cc: idr wg <idr@ietf.org>, V6 Ops List <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] BGP Identifier
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 20:13:26 -0000

Hi,

>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fan-idr-ipv6-bgp-id
>>  "IPv6 BGP Identifier Capability for BGP-4", Peng Fan, Zhenqiang Li,
>>  2014-02-12
> 
> please no.  if you can not assign a unique four octet integer to each
> router in your network, then you have much bigger problems.  and adding
> a capability and more complexity to try to patch over your inability to
> configure your routers will just compound your problems.

I agree. It's a shame that the router-id looks like an IPv4 address and IPv4 addresses are used to auto-configure it when the operator doesn't explicitly set it. There are too many people that think that a router-id is more than a 32-bit number and must be an IPv4 address, but creating more complexity to avoid educating router operators isn't the answer...

Cheers,
Sander