Re: [v6ops] [Idr] BGP Identifier

Mitchell Erblich <erblichs@earthlink.net> Fri, 14 February 2014 21:56 UTC

Return-Path: <erblichs@earthlink.net>
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 0681D1A03EA; Fri, 14 Feb 2014 13:56:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.948
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.948 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, J_CHICKENPOX_51=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548] autolearn=ham
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 EaGqxwrC-K5l; Fri, 14 Feb 2014 13:56:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 971891A041E; Fri, 14 Feb 2014 13:56:35 -0800 (PST)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=XRGro/O9N76JkbeyYo57ODtPkn9zgsBefJXR/wIbrScpuHdLJP7coHF2oSy6UIHy; h=Received:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
Received: from [76.21.83.101] (helo=[10.0.1.2]) by elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from <erblichs@earthlink.net>) id 1WEQkK-0002rt-1C; Fri, 14 Feb 2014 16:56:32 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
From: Mitchell Erblich <erblichs@earthlink.net>
In-Reply-To: <CA+b+ERk=DEge0cAxTsFh9Vnd3YC3eg_Pj+JETZzxDfsZAgPYUA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 13:56:29 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <E62B2F08-F7AE-4307-8586-07A9F8E5584E@earthlink.net>
References: <12AA6714-4BBE-4ACE-8191-AA107D04FBF4@cisco.com> <m2wqgyjifd.wl%randy@psg.com> <CA+b+ERk=DEge0cAxTsFh9Vnd3YC3eg_Pj+JETZzxDfsZAgPYUA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283)
X-ELNK-Trace: 074f60c55517ea841aa676d7e74259b7b3291a7d08dfec798185fcf19880707e8156002497107ca4350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 76.21.83.101
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/WNfHzUR71cSTYhLkdRnL-kqcoxo
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 17:17:48 -0800
Cc: idr wg <idr@ietf.org>, V6 Ops List <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] [Idr] 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 21:56:43 -0000

For some minor consistency,  

 I think that some LAN protocols prefer a loopback (assume always up) addr and then secondarily an interface addr.

Mitchell Erblich




On Feb 14, 2014, at 1:05 AM, Robert Raszuk wrote:

> I agree with Randy'a point here. 
> 
> BGP rtr_id does not need to be a routable address - it just needs to be unique 32 bits within the domain scope. 
> 
> We have had this discussion already during RFC6286 and concluded that 4 octet is sufficient for any type of BGP mesh. 
> 
> If anything I would propose to go opposite and to ask your implementation to allow UTF-8 encoded BGP rtr_id format. 
> 
> Rgs,
> R.
> 
> 
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 7:51 AM, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
> > 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.
> 
> randy
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> Idr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> Idr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr