Top-reply (sorry) and first-of-thread reply (also sorry): The diagram question/issue might be addressed by referencing the better-than-Gao-Rexford model published in RFC7908 (included in the References). It has actual diagrams, including the initial role labeling on peering sessions (excluding RS and RS-client but otherwise more complete than G/R).
Would that help address your concerns? Brian Dickson (Contributor, and co-author of 7908) On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 5:01 PM Gyan Mishra via Datatracker < nore...@ietf.org> wrote: > Reviewer: Gyan Mishra > Review result: Ready with Nits > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed > by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just > like any other last call comments. > > For more information, please see the FAQ at > > <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. > > Document: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-open-policy-?? > Reviewer: Gyan Mishra > Review Date: 2021-12-21 > IETF LC End Date: 2021-12-17 > IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat > > Summary: This draft provides a new BGP open role capability and OTC path > attribute to detect and mitigate route leaks automatically. I have been > following this draft on IDR and supported through Adoption and WGLC. This > document has matured and is ready for publication. The new BGP role > capabilities mismatch code 2 subcode 8 discussed on ML seems to have > multiple > implementations deployed and one confined by Cisco. I agree that the > authors > should request a new subcode for the role mismatch notification. > > Major issues: > None > > Minor issues: > None > > Nits/editorial comments: > Comment related to Gao-Rexford model. The Gao-Rexford Model only has 3 > peer > types North bound upstream Provider, Southbound Customer and lateral same > tier > level peer. With the role capabilities, RS and RS-Client is added which > makes > it slightly different but almost identical. In describing the role types > would > it make sense to have a graphical depiction of Gao-Redford model with the > role > capabilities on adjacent peers to help explain the role relationship for > local > and remote-as. Just an idea to help explain the role capabilities. In the > role correctness section scenario where the peer receives multiple role > capabilities to send role mismatch notification. What if there is a timing > issue and the multiple are received after the BGP open and peer is > established > possible sequence of events issue. Is it possible the peer may not get a > mismatch notification if the peer establishes prior to getting a different > capabilities where a mismatch or problem exists that is missed that could > result in a route leak. I am thinking of possibly false positive or > negative or > negative during BGP open capabilities exchange > > > _______________________________________________ > Idr mailing list > i...@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr >
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
