diff --git a/draft-ymbk-bgp-discovery-layers.txt b/draft-ymbk-bgp-discovery-layers.txt index 259aaeb..4191edc 100644 --- a/draft-ymbk-bgp-discovery-layers.txt +++ b/draft-ymbk-bgp-discovery-layers.txt @@ -194,11 +194,17 @@ Internet-Draft Trade-offs in BGP Peer Discovery May 2020 [I-D.acee-idr-lldp-peer-discovery] describes how to use the LLDP IETF Organizationally Specific TLV to augment the LLDP TLV set to - transport BGP Config Sub-TLVs signaling AFI, IP address (IPv4 or - IPv6), Local ASs, Local BGP Identifier (aka, BGP Router ID), Session - Group-ID, BGP [Authentication] Session Capabilities, and Local - Address (Next Hop). Which iof these are really necessary could be - discussed. + transport BGP Config Sub-TLVs signaling + + o AFI, + o IP address (IPv4 or IPv6), + o Local ASs, + o Local BGP Identifier (AKA, BGP Router ID), + o Session Group-ID, + o BGP [Authentication] Session Capabilities, and + o Local Address (Next Hop). + + Which of these are really necessary could be discussed. 7.2. Layer-3 Discovery Protocol (L3dl) @@ -208,16 +214,10 @@ Internet-Draft Trade-offs in BGP Peer Discovery May 2020 abilities, and link liveness which may then be disseminated using BGP-SPF and similar protocols. - This is similar but not quite the sane as the needs of this IDR - Design Team. E.g., the result is likely more complex than is needed. - A week's work could customize the design for the IDR Design Team's - needs. But ... - - Unlike LLDP, L3DL has only one implementation and is not widely - deployed. - - - + L3DL Upper Layer Protocol Configuration, [I-D.ymbk-lsvr-l3dl-ulpc], + details signaling the minimal set of parameters needed to start a BGP + session with a discovered peer. Details such as loopback peering are + handled by attributes in the L3DL protocol itself. @@ -226,6 +226,19 @@ Bush Expires November 26, 2020 [Page 4] Internet-Draft Trade-offs in BGP Peer Discovery May 2020 + o AS number, + o IP address, IPv4 or IPv6, and + o BGP Authentication. + + This is similar but not quite the sane as the needs of this IDR + Design Team. E.g., L3DL is designed to meet more complex needs. + L3DL's reedecesor, LSOE, [I-D.ymbk-lsvr-lsoe], was simpler and might + be a better candidate for adaptation. A week's work could customize + the design for the IDR Design Team's needs. But ... + + Unlike LLDP, L3DL has only one implementation, and LSOE only one open + source implementation, and neither is significantly deployed. + 8. Discovery at Layer Three Discovery at Layer-3 can assume IP addressability, though the IP @@ -262,6 +275,13 @@ Internet-Draft Trade-offs in BGP Peer Discovery May 2020 Rendezvous approaches may appeal to deployments which favor a central control framework. + + +Bush Expires November 26, 2020 [Page 5] + +Internet-Draft Trade-offs in BGP Peer Discovery May 2020 + + On the other hand, those who favor distributed protocols will have the classic worries about fragility, redundancy, reliability, etc. @@ -273,15 +293,6 @@ Internet-Draft Trade-offs in BGP Peer Discovery May 2020 The IDR BGP Discovery Design Team. - - - - -Bush Expires November 26, 2020 [Page 5] - -Internet-Draft Trade-offs in BGP Peer Discovery May 2020 - - 12. IANA Considerations None @@ -299,6 +310,16 @@ Internet-Draft Trade-offs in BGP Peer Discovery May 2020 and Liveness", draft-ietf-lsvr-l3dl-04 (work in progress), May 2020. + [I-D.ymbk-lsvr-l3dl-ulpc] + Bush, R. and K. Patel, "L3DL Upper Layer Protocol + Configuration", draft-ymbk-lsvr-l3dl-ulpc-03 (work in + progress), May 2020. + + [I-D.ymbk-lsvr-lsoe] + Bush, R., Austein, R., and K. Patel, "Link State Over + Ethernet", draft-ymbk-lsvr-lsoe-03 (work in progress), + November 2018. + [RFC6830] Farinacci, D., Fuller, V., Meyer, D., and D. Lewis, "The Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)", RFC 6830, DOI 10.17487/RFC6830, January 2013, @@ -308,6 +329,15 @@ Appendix A. Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank . + + + + +Bush Expires November 26, 2020 [Page 6] + +Internet-Draft Trade-offs in BGP Peer Discovery May 2020 + + Author's Address Randy Bush @@ -333,4 +363,30 @@ Author's Address -Bush Expires November 26, 2020 [Page 6] + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Bush Expires November 26, 2020 [Page 7] diff --git a/draft-ymbk-bgp-discovery-layers.xml b/draft-ymbk-bgp-discovery-layers.xml index 9021c02..c07d47a 100644 --- a/draft-ymbk-bgp-discovery-layers.xml +++ b/draft-ymbk-bgp-discovery-layers.xml @@ -277,11 +277,35 @@ describes how to use the LLDP IETF Organizationally Specific TLV to augment - the LLDP TLV set to transport BGP Config Sub-TLVs signaling AFI, - IP address (IPv4 or IPv6), Local ASs, Local BGP Identifier (aka, - BGP Router ID), Session Group-ID, BGP [Authentication] Session - Capabilities, and Local Address (Next Hop). Which iof these are - really necessary could be discussed. + the LLDP TLV set to transport BGP Config Sub-TLVs signaling + + + + + AFI, + + + IP address (IPv4 or IPv6), + + + Local ASs, + + + Local BGP Identifier (AKA, BGP Router ID), + + + Session Group-ID, + + + BGP [Authentication] Session Capabilities, and + + + Local Address (Next Hop). + + + + + Which of these are really necessary could be discussed. @@ -298,14 +322,38 @@ - This is similar but not quite the sane as the needs of this IDR - Design Team. E.g., the result is likely more complex than is - needed. A week's work could customize the design for the IDR - Design Team's needs. But ... + L3DL Upper Layer Protocol Configuration, , details signaling the + minimal set of parameters needed to start a BGP session with a + discovered peer. Details such as loopback peering are handled + by attributes in the L3DL protocol itself. + + + + + AS number, + + + IP address, IPv4 or IPv6, and + + + BGP Authentication. + + - Unlike LLDP, L3DL has only one implementation and is not widely + This is similar but not quite the sane as the needs of this IDR + Design Team. E.g., L3DL is designed to meet more complex needs. + L3DL's reedecesor, LSOE, , + was simpler and might be a better candidate for adaptation. A + week's work could customize the design for the IDR Design Team's + needs. But ... + + + + Unlike LLDP, L3DL has only one implementation, and LSOE only one + open source implementation, and neither is significantly deployed. @@ -406,6 +454,8 @@ + +