Hi Robert,

From: Robert Raszuk


Hi Bruno,

[Bruno] The goal was to be able to use gshut even if both EBGP peer are not 
enhanced to support it. The benefit of flagging routes with a community is that 
gshut may be implemented on vanilla routers using a BGP route map/policy.

​Sure thing. However peers need to be consistently configured with ​the same 
policy to understand the meaning of the community.

If you think this is easy - great.

[Bruno2] On the receiver side, this is regular use of BGP community between 2 
ASes. I’m not trying to evaluate simplicity or easiness.  That being said, 
community is a pretty common tool, including between ASes. So definitely doable 
IMHO.

On the sender side (gshut initiator), there is a need to attach a new 
community, e.g. though the application of the gshut BGP policy. Difficulty is 
implementation dependent. This part is clearly easier when implemented by the 
OS as part of the shutdown of the BGP session.
Incremental deployment in a benefit, in particular between AS/organisations, 
and in particular on small/low end routers which are not replaced every 4 years.

​Well it is not router replacement .. it is software upgrade.

[Bruno2] I do make the distinction. Indeed, this is a control plane only 
feature, which can be implemented by a software upgrade. Yet, even software 
upgrade may be costly when it involves thousands of CE routers in 1000 of 
locations and 100s of actors. Especially for small CE routers which do not 
support High Availability features.
Then you have “legacy” plateform, i.e. vendors not providing software upgrade 
anymore.

But sure ​if you can convince peers to setup same error free policy that is 
perfect. No objections at all :).
[Bruno2] I do believe that peers are capable of configuring a BGP policy 
matching one BGP community.
My intention is not to convince unwilling peers, but to provide this as a 
service for peers willing to reduce the impact of a BGP session shutdown. 
Actually, the request was coming from my peers which were affected by my 
maintenance operations requiring the eBGP session shutdown.

Best,
Bruno

​Best,
R.​


_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.

_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow

Reply via email to