randy/draft-bgp-discovery-layers
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

flesh out acee and l3dl/lsoe a bit more

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Randy Bush 2020-05-25 20:25:05 -07:00
parent 939e2502dd
commit f79d3cc9cb
2 changed files with 141 additions and 35 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

70
draft-ymbk-bgp-discovery-layers.xml
View file

@ -277,11 +277,35 @@
<t>
<xref target="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.
the LLDP TLV set to transport BGP Config Sub-TLVs signaling
</t>
<t>
<list style="symbols">
<t>
AFI,
</t>
<t>
IP address (IPv4 or IPv6),
</t>
<t>
Local ASs,
</t>
<t>
Local BGP Identifier (AKA, BGP Router ID),
</t>
<t>
Session Group-ID,
</t>
<t>
BGP [Authentication] Session Capabilities, and
</t>
<t>
Local Address (Next Hop).
</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>
Which of these are really necessary could be discussed.
</t>
</section>
@ -298,14 +322,38 @@
</t>
<t>
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, <xref
target="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.
</t>
<t>
<list style="symbols">
<t>
AS number,
</t>
<t>
IP address, IPv4 or IPv6, and
</t>
<t>
BGP Authentication.
</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>
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, <xref target="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 ...
</t>
<t>
Unlike LLDP, L3DL has only one implementation, and LSOE only one
open source implementation, and neither is significantly
deployed.
</t>
@ -406,6 +454,8 @@
<?rfc include="reference.RFC.6830"?>
<?rfc include="reference.I-D.acee-idr-lldp-peer-discovery"?>
<?rfc include="reference.I-D.ietf-lsvr-l3dl"?>
<?rfc include="reference.I-D.ymbk-lsvr-l3dl-ulpc"?>
<?rfc include="reference.I-D.ymbk-lsvr-lsoe"?>
</references>
<!--