Hi Susan, Correct. I will update the text to say "discard" instead of "ignore" and add a reference to RFC7606 in rev24 once the submission tool reopens.
Thanks, Neeraj On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 6:14 AM Susan Hares <sha...@ndzh.com> wrote: > Neeraj: > > > > Thank you for adding the BGP error handling to your text. > > > > If I understand your addition in -23, this draft treats a malformed BGP > Community as “attribute discard”. > > > > Malformed Extended Community: If a PE detects a malformed EVPN Link > > Bandwidth Extended Community, for example because the "Value-Units" > > has a value other than 0x00 or 0x01, it MUST ignore the extended community > > and handle the BGP route as it would if it was received without this > extended community.¶ > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-unequal-lb-23#section-4.1.1-1.3.1> > > > > Does “ignore” mean you discarding the extended community attribute and not > forwarding it to another peer? > > > > Here’s the “attribute discard text from RFC7606”: > > > > For any malformed attribute that is handled by the "attribute > > discard" instead of the "treat-as-withdraw" approach, it is critical > > to consider the potential impact of doing so. In particular, if the > > attribute in question has or may have an effect on route selection or > > installation, the presumption is that discarding it is unsafe unless > > careful analysis proves otherwise. The analysis should take into > > account the tradeoff between preserving connectivity and potential > > side effects. > > > > > > Cheerily, Sue > > > > *From:* Neeraj Malhotra <neeraj.i...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Monday, October 21, 2024 12:19 PM > *To:* Susan Hares <sha...@ndzh.com> > *Cc:* BESS <bess@ietf.org>; bess-cha...@ietf.org > *Subject:* Re: [bess] draft-ietf-bess-evpn-unequal-lb-22 > > > > > > > > Hi Susan, > > > > Many thanks for the review and comments below. All of the comments below > are incorporated into revision 23. > > > > Thanks, > > Neeraj > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 8:48 AM Susan Hares <sha...@ndzh.com> wrote: > > BESS WG, BESS chairs, and authors: > > > > This is a requested review from IDR chairs for > draft-ietf-bess-evpn-unequal-lb-22.txt > > > > I’m not attaching a file because it is short. > > > > Cheerily, Sue Hares > > > > -------------- > > > > *Status:* Ready with nits (small technical nits and editorial nits) > > *Summary:* This is a very useful draft for EVPN. > > The draft has solid technical content and flow. > > A few minor edits will fill in the gaps. > > > > *Caveat:* Keyur Patel said he reviewed this draft, but non-of the chairs > (IDR and BESS) can find it. > > > > I’m sure Keyur review was great. I just can find it. > > > > *Editorial/technical issue: * > > > > Section 4.1 - you should clear state that value units outside of 0x00 or > 0x01 are invalid. > > Also, you should clearly state only 0x00 and 0x01 are valid. > > > > Section 4.1 - what happens if Extended Community is malformed? See > RFC7606. > > Please provide details. You are missing a clearly delineated section on > BGP error handling. > > > > *Editorial only: * > > > > 1) spelling check: > > > > 5.2 - recevied - paragraph 1, sentence 1 > > 5.2 - badwidth - paragraph 5, stanrding Please note. > > 6.2 - (VLAN-a % 4) - last paragraph. > > > > Section 10.0 - IANA considerastions needs to use a better formatting. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > BESS mailing list -- bess@ietf.org > To unsubscribe send an email to bess-le...@ietf.org > >
_______________________________________________ BESS mailing list -- bess@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to bess-le...@ietf.org
