Job, Melchior, and Massimiliano,

Your draft-sas-idr-maxprefix-inbound-05 can be good solution to problems 
described in Section 3.2 of the 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement/
Most Cloud operators eBGP peering only supports limited number of routes from 
external entities. The maximum routes can exceeds the limit by the unintended 
Route Leaks by the peers, not properly aggregated routes, or other events.

When a Cloud GW (or BGP speaker) receives routes exceeding the threshold of the 
max routes limit but not yet exceeding the max limit, some routes should be 
allowed. For example,  unintended route leaks to Cloud GW might deserve being 
discarded, while the peer's own routes should still be allowed.  Can you add 
another option to your Section 2?


  *   When number of inbound routes reach a threshold (which is set lower than 
the actual Max Route Limit for the eBGP peer), discards new address prefixes 
whose AS paths is more than xx from the peer , while maintaining the BGP 
connection in Established state.

Is it reasonable to generate an in-band message to notify the peer of threshold 
crossing?
Right not, only Cease Notification is generated. It would be helpful to have 
notification messages when some routes are discarded.

Thanks, Linda Dunbar

_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

Reply via email to