Hello, I guess you have already mentioned this, however I have not found it yet. Please consider many AS have many different views. That's it.
Alejandro, On Sun, Apr 25, 2021, 8:03 AM Robert Raszuk <rob...@raszuk.net> wrote: > > > for example: 23456.lookingglass for AS 23456. > > > I was just about to propose to define a notion of well known URL for > looking glass. > > > Let's grab bgp.io domain (it seems available) and allow each domain to > submit their IP to well known name mapping. In fact looking glasses may be > just one of many such well known tools to help with operational aspects of > the Internet. > > > In such cases no signalling would be necessary at all and you can always > go to 23456.lookingglass.bgp.io with an obvious alias (23456.lg.bgp.io) > to see if your routes made it via peer's policy/best path etc ... In case > ASN has more then one LG in each region same thing ... you define a few > such addresses to indicate each server or LG server pool. > > > Thx, > R. > > > PS. However if we want to down the BGP inline signalling for this I > recommend we take a look at: > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-idr-operational-message-00 Seems > to me like defining new TLV there would be very good fit for what is being > proposed here. > > > > On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 7:55 AM Jakob Heitz (jheitz) <jheitz= > 40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > >> This is a great thing to do, but I would not use a BGP capability to do >> it. >> >> The capability is signaled only in the BGP OPEN message, at the start of >> the session. >> >> Changes cannot be signaled without bouncing the session. >> >> The BGP capability is only exchanged with neighbors. >> >> Perhaps we could do it with a new address family or >> >> standardize the form of the URL, say invent a new top level domain: >> .lookingglass >> >> and then the URL could be the ASN followed by the TLD, for example: >> >> 23456.lookingglass for AS 23456. >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Jakob. >> >> >> >> *From:* GROW <grow-boun...@ietf.org> *On Behalf Of * Rayhaan Jaufeerally >> (IETF) >> *Sent:* Saturday, April 24, 2021 6:38 AM >> *To:* grow@ietf.org >> *Subject:* [GROW] BGP Looking Glass Capability >> >> >> >> Dear GROW chairs and participants, >> >> >> >> I would like to propose draft-jaufeerally-bgp-lg-cap-00 ( >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jaufeerally-bgp-lg-cap/) as a >> mechanism for in-band dissemination of looking glass endpoints in BGP, >> using a new OPEN message capability. >> >> >> >> The rationale behind this is to facilitate automation around eBGP >> peering, for example to make it possible to automatically detect if the >> peer has accepted some routes which are expected to be accepted. >> >> >> >> I'm aware that the underlying RFC8522 is an informational RFC and leaves >> some details unspecified for the response format (i.e. a schema for the >> queries/responses) but I believe that can be further refined in other works >> independent to this proposal. >> >> >> >> I would like to hear what the WG thinks, if this is a reasonable proposal >> which fits into the broader charter of GROW? >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Rayhaan >> _______________________________________________ >> GROW mailing list >> GROW@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow >> > _______________________________________________ > GROW mailing list > GROW@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow >
_______________________________________________ GROW mailing list GROW@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
