Subject: [Idr] Regarding comments on draft-wang-idr-bgp-ifit-capabilities

From: Lizhenbin <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 15:54:55 +0000

Hi Tonny,
I am not sure if you do not like BGP to take too much unnecessary work. But the advantage of BGP is apparent:
1. BGP should not be used for management plane: Before BGP-LS, the topology can be collected by SNMP. BGP-LS definitely has much advantages in the performance and interoperability and becomes the de facto standard for SDN controller to collect topology information.
2. BGP should not be used for non-routing work. But BGP can be utilized to negotiate seamless BFD information.

BGP already becomes a god protocol :)

Best Regards,
Robin

---

From: Gert Doering <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 17:22:18 +0100

Hi,

> BGP already becomes a god protocol :)

More like "kitchen sink", and this is not a positive evolution.

Gert Doering
        -- Operator
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                      Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14        Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                 HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444         USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

---

From: "Susan Hares" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 11:48:45 -0500

Robin and Tony and IDR:

The following excerpt from the minutes from today's session may be helpful
to this discussion.

The basic questions are:

1) Why not use a management plane?
2) If routing, why not limited to BGP-LS peers as information transport?
3) How do you limit the scope of distribution to local area?

Prior to any adoption call, we need to reach group consensus on this points.

Thank you, Sue

Excerpt from minutes
=======
Tony Li: Can this be served using management plane instead of using BGP?
Randy Bush (from chat): +1 to Tony.
Jeffrey Haas (from chat): As a further follow-up to Tony Li’s point, this
stuff would make a lot of sense in BGP-LS.

Tony: Think the IFIT information is not related to routing.
Yali: This information may be used to select a path on which IFIT can be
used.
Eduard V (from chat): SDN Controller (or NMS) is probably mandatory anyway
to collect and analyze. Hence, this discovery could be moved to it too.

Tony Li (from chat): Exactly. This is a data plane capability discovery
requirement.
Sue: Suggest to provide some more details about on why this should be
included in BGP prior to WG adoption call.
Tony Li (from chat)： Exactly. This is a data plane capability discovery
requirement.
Jeffrey Haas（from chat: It has a binding to routing state, so it makes some
sense. but the scoping requirements are tricky.

-----Original Message-----
From: Idr [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Lizhenbin
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2021 10:55 AM
To: Tony Li
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [Idr] Regarding comments on draft-wang-idr-bgp-ifit-capabilities

Hi Tonny,
I am not sure if you do not like BGP to take too much unnecessary work. But
the advantage of BGP is apparent:
1. BGP should not be used for management plane: Before BGP-LS, the topology
can be collected by SNMP. BGP-LS definitely has much advantages in the
performance and interoperability and becomes the de facto standard for SDN
controller to collect topology information.
2. BGP should not be used for non-routing work. But BGP can be utilized to
negotiate seamless BFD information.

Best Regards,
Robin

_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr