From: Robert Raszuk Sent: Friday, March 17, 2017 1:34 PM
> The primary benefit is the use of a well-known community Not that long ago we went via tsunami of IDR on and offline emails when discussing large communities which contained "operators" voice stating *NO* to any well known or predefined meaning to the communities nor welcomed any predefined actions associated with the communities. Everyone wants to assign his own and inform interested parties about such meaning. Has that already changed just few weeks after the RFC was issued :-) ? 1. the peer initiating the shutdown (A) sends its peer (B) a NOTIFICATION with a new error code that means “I’m going away shortly, please start re-converging and let me know when you’re done”. 2. B attempts to re-converge around the paths learnt from A (possibly needing to initiate a route-refresh in the process?), and once it no longer has any of those routes in its FIB sends A back a further NOTIFICATION saying “I’m finished” and then shuts the session down. 3. If A hasn’t heard back within a configurable timeout, then it yanks the session anyway. Yes that's good summary. If so, that sounds like a hell of a lot of new protocol spec I don't think this is that complex. And use of NOTIFICATION message was just an example. One could also put it in new OPERATIONAL message. [Bruno] You are welcome to write such a draft and have it implemented. Again, draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut is using a BGP community for the signaling as it brings compatibility with vanilla routers. --Bruno Anyhow just a suggestion how to improve protocol if there is real need. If this however as you said "fairly marginal issue" then let's not bother. Cheers, R. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.
_______________________________________________ GROW mailing list GROW@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
