As I recall, the original authors would be given an opportunity for the "bis" in the past. Has there been a change to the practice?
Thanks. -- Enke On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 12:41 PM Robert Raszuk <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Jeff and WGs, > > #1 > > Could you kindly elaborate how changing the definition of T bit in -bis > draft does address this scope: > > - Address the origination and reception of non-transitive routes across > eBGP boundaries. > > With that please kindly clarify up front what T bit of extended community > has to do with routes ? Then please explain what is the issue with current > definition of T bit in RFC4360 in respect to draft-ietf-bess-ebgp-dmz while > in the same time it does not collide in any way or form with > draft-ietf-idr-link-bandwidth (which is proceeding fine forward). > > #2 > > I am completely not comfortable to adopt this document. To me RFC4360 was > always very clearly written and in fact flexibility of having opaque > transitiveness across ASNs was a good feature not a bug. > > #3 > > I am against wiping out original authors of RFC4360 with just a few lines > of pretty much at best cosmetic changes ... replacing them with a single > name - even if such practice complies with IETF process (not sure if -bis > is even needed here). > > Network Working Group S. Sangli > Request for Comments: 4360 D. Tappan > Category: Standards Track Cisco Systems > Y. Rekhter > Juniper Networks > February 2006 > > > Kind regards, > Robert > > > > On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 9:23 PM Jeffrey Haas <[email protected]> wrote: > >> IDR, BESS, >> >> During the work driven by draft-ietf-idr-link-bandwidth, the issue of >> originating non-transitive was brought up and partially discussed in the >> use case work for draft-ietf-bess-ebgp-dmz. As discussed during IDR >> sessions at IETFs 122 and 123, the preferred solution for addressing the >> ambiguities in non-transitivity was to do a small -bis for RFC 4360. Nat >> Kao has kindly agreed to be our editor to move this process along. This >> document, and issues vs. it, will be managed in the IDR github.[1] >> >> Since this is IDR chair commissioned work to address this gap, it's our >> intention to adopt this work. However, the chairs would like to provide a >> review period to OBJECT to adoption. That said, if you'd like to offer >> support for the work, or other technical comments, please do so in this >> thread! >> >> This adoption check ends on 5 September. Please note this overlaps the >> US Labor Day holiday and consider that in the timing of your request, in >> case that's relevant. >> >> The scope of the commissioned work is: >> >> - Address open errata vs. RFC 4360 >> - Address the origination and reception of non-transitive routes across >> eBGP boundaries. >> >> The current text of the draft currently addresses these items. >> >> As part of reviewing this problem, the IETF archives show that there was >> prior work covering this issue in >> draft-decraene-idr-rfc4360-clarification-00 [2]. We've made sure to >> acknowledge those prior efforts in the -bis and would request review from >> those authors on this -bis. >> >> -- Jeff (for the IDR Chairs) >> >> [1] https://github.com/ietf-wg-idr/draft-ietf-idr-rfc4360-bis >> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_ietf-2Dwg-2Didr_draft-2Dietf-2Didr-2Drfc4360-2Dbis&d=DwMFaQ&c=V9IgWpI5PvzTw83UyHGVSoW3Uc1MFWe5J8PTfkrzVSo&r=OPLTTSu-451-QhDoSINhI2xYdwiMmfF5A2l8luvN11E&m=V7Z_nufM6htxuC6g9hcYAkkpVQS-JyGNHK6Wm1Nuduy7mZoMhsd9pH2Tl1JJ59w8&s=aA4LvJqHxTQVHX4BuMxr4ylT-OVoeP--MNCtTiw1BEg&e=> >> [2] Bruno and company are to be commended for pressing this issue for >> several years. While prior IDR mail threads seem to suggest "this works >> fine was the answer", the fact that we had non-transitive behaviors as a >> point of contention in the BESS LBW work means it's past time to enshrine >> fixing the original criticisms in an RFC update. >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> *From: *[email protected] >> *Subject: **I-D Action: draft-chairs-idr-rfc4360-bis-00.txt* >> *Date: *August 22, 2025 at 2:46:40 PM EDT >> *To: *<[email protected]> >> *Reply-To: *[email protected] >> >> Internet-Draft draft-chairs-idr-rfc4360-bis-00.txt is now available. >> >> Title: BGP Extended Communities Attribute >> Author: Nat Kao >> Name: draft-chairs-idr-rfc4360-bis-00.txt >> Pages: 13 >> Dates: 2025-08-22 >> >> Abstract: >> >> This document describes the "extended community" BGP-4 attribute. >> This attribute provides a mechanism for labeling information carried >> in BGP-4. These labels can be used to control the distribution of >> this information, or for other applications. >> >> This document obsoletes [RFC4360]. >> >> The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chairs-idr-rfc4360-bis/ >> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__datatracker.ietf.org_doc_draft-2Dchairs-2Didr-2Drfc4360-2Dbis_&d=DwMFaQ&c=V9IgWpI5PvzTw83UyHGVSoW3Uc1MFWe5J8PTfkrzVSo&r=OPLTTSu-451-QhDoSINhI2xYdwiMmfF5A2l8luvN11E&m=V7Z_nufM6htxuC6g9hcYAkkpVQS-JyGNHK6Wm1Nuduy7mZoMhsd9pH2Tl1JJ59w8&s=RsWS4MQQJQBvg31YK91w7KqUwmUR492AyXBTwhY74uw&e=> >> >> There is also an HTMLized version available at: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-chairs-idr-rfc4360-bis-00 >> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__datatracker.ietf.org_doc_html_draft-2Dchairs-2Didr-2Drfc4360-2Dbis-2D00&d=DwMFaQ&c=V9IgWpI5PvzTw83UyHGVSoW3Uc1MFWe5J8PTfkrzVSo&r=OPLTTSu-451-QhDoSINhI2xYdwiMmfF5A2l8luvN11E&m=V7Z_nufM6htxuC6g9hcYAkkpVQS-JyGNHK6Wm1Nuduy7mZoMhsd9pH2Tl1JJ59w8&s=bB2Do7F9QnSCpCWzWD7pnNgyfI_dNwSGpSCPEpFN6UU&e=> >> >> Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at: >> rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> I-D-Announce mailing list -- [email protected] >> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> BESS mailing list -- [email protected] >> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >> > _______________________________________________ > Idr mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >
_______________________________________________ BESS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
