Hi Bruno & all, Just focusing on Q1:
> 1) For people not following SIDR, could you please elaborate > on why http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-idr-custom-decision-04 > has not been used? (via the registration of a new Point of > Insertion specific to origin validation) (as I though draft-ietf-idr- > custom-decision was intended to be the last time BGP decision > process would be modified) Few observations: A. draft-ietf-sidr-origin-validation-signaling does not really modify a BGP best path selection .. it adds a check before BGP best path selection algorithm kicks in. B. Adding new POI is not needed as we already have a POI = 128 which is to be executed before any step in BGP best path selection hence at exactly the same point as this draft recommends. therefor one obvious question comes in: C. Based on A & B there is clear conflict not addresses in the draft. Assume both custom decision with POI = 128 "ABSOLUTE_VALUE" as well as origin validation are enabled. Moreover assume they result in opposite decisions. So the question of the day is: "Which of those two is the one to win the pre best path check ?" Effectively - which of those two is more important ? The answer to this question should be included in the draft. And I do suspect authors of both drafts will answer: mine ! Thx, R. _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
