Subject: [GROW] Proposed updates to GROW charter

From: Job Snijders <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2019 19:21:13 +0000

Dear working group, AD,

Warren asked us as chairs to assess whether revising the GROW charter
was warrented, and if so propose an update. We've come up with the
below.

It is entirely possible we've overlooked something, we'd love your
feedback on the below charter, goals & milestones. Please share on-list
or off-list with [email-masked]

Kind regards,

Job & Chris
GROW chairs

Charter for GROW Working Group
===============================

The Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) is fundamental to the operation of the
Internet. In recent years, occurrences of BGP related operational issues
have increased, and while overall understanding of the default-free
routing system has improved, there is still a long and growing list of
concerns. Among these are routing table growth rates, interaction of
interior and exterior routing protocols, dynamic properties of the
routing system, and the effects of routing policy on both the size and
dynamic nature of the routing table. In addition, new and innovative
uses of BGP, such as the use of BGP as a signaling protocol for some
types of Virtual Private Networks, have created new and unexpected
operational issues.
 
The purpose of the GROW is to consider the operational problems
associated with the IPv4 and IPv6 global routing systems, including but
not limited to routing table growth, the effects of the interactions
between interior and exterior routing protocols, and the effect of
address allocation policies and practices on the global routing system.
Finally, where appropriate, the GROW documents the operational aspects
of measurement, monitoring, policy, security, and VPN infrastructures,
and safe default behavior of implementations.
 
GROW will also advise various working groups, specifically the IDR and
SIDROPS working groups, with respect to whether it is addressing the
relevant operational and routing security needs of networks, and where
appropriate, suggest course corrections or intervene. Finally,
operational requirements developed in GROW can also be used by any new
working group charged with standardizing a next generation inter-domain
routing protocol.
 
Goals
=====

* Provide stewardship and maintenance for the BGP Monitoring Protocol
  (BMP)
* Document Best Current Practises for operations of the Internet routing
  system.
* Analyze aspects of supporting new applications, including extending
  existing routing protocols and creating new ones. This includes risk,
  interference and application fit.
* Document the operational aspects of securing the Internet routing
  system, and provide recommendations to other WGs.
* Provide documentation to assist in avoiding clear malpractice in the
  global routing system.

Milestones
==========

Jan 2020 - "Support for Local RIB in BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP)" to IESG
Feb 2020 - "BMP Peer Up Message Namespace" to IESG
Apr 2020 - "Revision to Registration Procedures for Multiple BMP Registries" to IESG.
Jul 2020 - “Document negative consequences of de-aggregating received  routes for traffic engineering purposes” - to IESG
Nov 2020 - "TLV support for BMP Route Monitoring and Peer Down Messages" to IESG.
Jan 2021 - “A BCP on using IRR and RPKI data to improve filtering of BGP peering sessions” to IESG or via “Evolving Documents”

---

From: Nick Hilliard <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 00:03:01 +0000

Job Snijders wrote on 28/10/2019 19:21:
> or off-list [email-masked]

The old goals were oddly specific; the new goals are oddly non-specific. 
  I'm puzzled by the shift between these two opposites.

Nick

---

From: Job Snijders <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2019 19:10:37 -0500

>   I'm puzzled by the shift between these two opposites.

Agreed. I don’t really know why the current goals were specified the way
they are, they seem to stem back from the early 2000s. If there was a
strategic purpose to being this specific it eludes me, or perhaps nobody
looked at the goals in a while?

My hope is that the proposed update aligns our description with our
activities.

Kind regards,

Job

---

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2019 19:39:05 -0700

> The old goals were oddly specific; the new goals are oddly
> non-specific.  I'm puzzled by the shift between these two opposites.

see ocean?  see match?

---

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2019 19:40:11 -0700

> I don’t really know why the current goals were specified the way they
> are

because working groups used to have bounded and achievable goals

randy

---

From: Robert Raszuk <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 07:32:57 -0400

Hi Job,

As others pointed out I think the goals would benefit from being more
precise.

As example I see third goal very generic which could include everything for
next years to come ;)

On the other hand if it is not explicit it may be harder for GROW to go via
IESG with some work.

Examples which I would suggest to get added:

* work on ops practices of performance based routing

* work on ops practices of sdwan deployments using bgp

* work on ops aspects of internet te

etc..

Many thx
R.

On Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 15:21 Job Snijders <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Jul 2020 - “Document negative consequences of de-aggregating received
> routes for traffic engineering purposes” - to IESG
> Jan 2021 - “A BCP on using IRR and RPKI data to improve filtering of BGP
> peering sessions” to IESG or via “Evolving Documents”
>
> _______________________________________________
> GROW mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
>

---

From: Nick Hilliard <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2019 15:55:04 +0000

> My hope is that the proposed update aligns our description with our 

It does, but it also aligns with lots of other things.  Too generic is 
not a good thing.

That said, GROW fulfils an important niche at IETF, not just for 
producing its own RFCs, but also acting as a reference point for other 
WGs.  So it badly needs not to be closed down (randy, take note).

I've re-worked your proposal.  Please feel free to add / remove / modify 
/ ignore / throw in volcano as you see fit.

* Provide stewardship and maintenance for the BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP)
* Develop and document Best Current Practises for operations in the 
Internet routing system.
* Develop and document the operational aspects of securing the Internet 
routing system including management of filtering and routing leaks.
* Analyse, document and provide best practice characteristics of running 
BGP at large scale
* Provide analysis, feedback and assistance for other IETF working 
groups when their subject matter impacts on the global Internet routing 
ecosystem.

Nick

---

From: Melchior Aelmans <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2019 17:12:43 -0700

I would like to express my support for updating the GROW charter and I
think with the addition below it is going into the right direction.