Hi,

> ‚ÄčThe problem with 16:16 and now with endorsing 32:32:32 is that it still 
> requires an external oracle to manually translate encoded magic number into 
> set of actions. 

It provides flexible behaviour that can be agreed upon between consenting 
network operators. This is a feature, not a bug.

> Let me provide an example: 
> 
> ‚ÄčI have 400 PEs and I want to do 10 different length of prepends depending on 
> the peering AS. 
> 
> So today when I advertise the prefix I need 10 different communites for it 
> and 10 different policies on each out of my 399 egress PEs to translate such 
> magic number into an action. 
> 
> While injecting 10 communities is not a big deal maintaining 10 different 
> policies across all 399 PEs adds-up

Networks with 400 PEs have management tools for that.

> and this is what makes the current BGP policies very long and difficult to 
> maintain.
> 
> And if we just add simple integer which will indicate the size of prepend and 
> within given AS make one magic number to indicate this is prepend request we 
> are neatly done.

I think -large combined with documented best practices on how to encode actions 
in the last 32 bit field would be much better. A best practice document is much 
easier to update and use than having to define new TLV types and waiting for 
router vendors to implement them.

And it allows people to copy&paste the best practice when they want, and 
implement their own policy if not.

Cheers,
Sander

_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list
GROW@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow

Reply via email to