Subject: [Idr] wg minutes

From: Yakov Rekhter <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 11:40:05 -0800

Folks,

Attached are the WG minutes. Please review them for
correctness. The deadline for comments is Dec 2, 2005.

Sue & Yakov.
----------------------------------------------------------------
IDR IETF 64

Minutes taken by Larry Blunk and Dave Ward
-------------
0. Doc Status (Sue Hares, Yakov Rekhter)

a. new draft to be reissued for 4-octet AS
b. AS Confeds - implementation report submitted and spec will go as DS
c. GR - post AD comments to PS
d. RR - have IESG comments, revised draft sub. and back to editor
e. 1863 went to historic
f. ton of stuff on editor queue (all to be pub'ed as package vs individual
docs)
g. MPBGP, Cease notify at editor
h. a lot no progress (see slides) due to lack of implementation report

Enke Chen: agreed to produce implementation report for outbound route filtering 

Pekka Savola: what is status of BGP MIB v2
Sue Hares: need two implementations
Yakov Rekhter: no implemenation report ... no progress

-------------
1. 4-octet AS extended commmunity - Yakov Rekhter
(no slides) 

Extended community needs to be able to support 4 byte ASN ext comm

Existing extended communities documnet removed text on 4 octet AS
extended communities, as there are no implementations.

New doc published for support (to not get in way of extended community
doc)

New doc produced via cut and paste protocol

It is currently an individual submission

Could be WG doc but, it will sit until any implementations

Geoff Huston: It should be a WG draft

Resulution: will send to mailing list and see if there is support
to making it a WG document

1A. YR request from Tony Li to make AS hop count a WG document
sent to list and only got few replies asked room ... no concensus ... not WG
doc yet

-------------
2. ORF groups  Sue Hares

See slides  for structure of UPDATE

See slides for usage scenarios

Geoff Huston: You have small parts of a boolean language ... why
not go all the way?

Sue: We were told during the last two meetings that we should shrink
back the functionality

Geoff Huston: Just add groups in groups and go for full boolean
logic

We have had a lot of arguments/discussion on this topic and request
more input.

Geoff Huston: Can't determine beforehand how complex someone may
want to get

Vach Kompella: What about other operands? E.g. "Not"

Need to see what you want or we are going full bore ...

Enke Chen: If goal is to simplify config .. .but, ORF originally
was not to simplify config but, to improve performance. It is unclear
how the config is simplified.

Sue Hares: It is an effort to expand power of config

Kireeti Kompella: The language is not boolean complete

Rudiger: The language helps the pain w/ config

Resolution: Will take back comments about missing functionality and
update draft and bring to WG.

-------------
3. Context AF - David Ward

See slides

Yakov: Clarification if we need to have larger work in IETF

David Ward: It is not dependent on that work and can work with existing
technology. A document will be written that associates diffserv architecture
to this work.

Sue - this looks like old IDR QOS revisited.   Dave - what's new
is always old.  Divergent from QOS bit.  Semantic free and opaque.
Service 42 is available but no meaning to semantics.  Sue - are you
mixing QOS pieces?

Sue - timeliness issue.  How do you ensure announcement is there
in time.

Chandra - could be useful to an application to group together
prefix/service - don't need to go to IANA.

Yakov - will you have different SAFI values for different AFI's?

Dave - could negotiate to RD's are all the way down to RT's, but
less flexible.

Yakov - bigger picture does not belong in IDR, only BGP changes.
Should the bigger picture come first ?

Sue - is all you are asking for is a different AFI?   Dave - Yes.
Add path and aggregate. withdraw would help, but not truly necessary.

Sue - AD's what is process for new AFI?   Bill - it says nothing,
would be sent to IESG which would send to back IDR.

Yakov - would IESG like to see big picture?  Alex Zinin - not ready
to answer that question, would like to see discussion on list. Dave
- propose MAVs BOF to discuss QOS things not related to BGP. Dave
- this is indepedent.  Alex - if working group discusses and believes
it can be used for other technologies and there is strong support.
Dave - I don't believe there are dependencies between outcome of
MAVs BOF and this proposal. Alex - sounds like discussion and
consensus is needed. Bruce Davie from Cisco - feels work does stand
alone if you assume there is a diffserv architecture; can look at
diffserv architecture for big picture context. Yakov - can someone
write document about how this fits into diffserv ?  Bruce will find
someone to do that.

-------------
4. Enke Chen - Extended Open Parameters

See slides
Problem ... we are running out of capability space

NAME? How does it work w/ ORF

Enke: It should work just fine. I don't understand.

Sue - were state machine changes included?   John promised to do
it. Needed to move forward.

Enke - should this become a WG item?  Don't need it today, but could
be important tomorrow.  Only 4 or so have read.

Yakov: need more people to read before progressing. Work will not
be done if no interest.

-------------
5. Chandra Appanna - Aggregate Withdraw

See slides

Ron Bonica - is there mechanism to ensure that you only withdraw
routes that you announce?  Chandra - routes are only for a particular
session.  Current draft is not transitive, but it could be so.

Yakov - time-to-withdraw could be used without agg. withdraw.
Chandra - yes.

Pekka - if we are using Secure BGP or SOBGP will it require special
processing?  Chandra - no, but haven't thought about it.

Sue - how does this relate to withdraw bags of routes, not sure.
Will take offline.

Dave - with agg. withdraw you match on attributes unlike bags. Could
be ASPATH, Origin, etc.  Chandra - designed to be general.

Yakov - could mark and organize by extended communities instead.
If you use communities, it will be easily transitive. Do we need
the others? Dave - if it's too much flexilibility, that's okay.
Dave - WG could determine that only communities are needed.

Yakov - not clear how to propagate agg. withdraw if applied to
things other than communities.   Will take this offline.

WG needs to decide if it wants to propagate agg. withdraw.

-------------
6. Gargi Nalawade - Tunneling applications

see slides

Yakov: Connector attribute carries a shortand for the tunnel, not just the
endpoint

Gargi: Yes

Yakov: It is even more than shortand but, a list of preferences for a set of
tunnels

Gargi: Yes, there is nothing in the draft that prevents this from happening

Yakov: Most work going on in L3VPN but, IDR will oversee

-------------
7. Gargi Nalawade - Multicast signaling using BGP

see slides

No comments

_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr