Hi Jakob, It's a good point that a looking glass is different from knowing if a specific route was accepted or not, and for this particular use case of knowing if a route was not accepted ORF could achieve that.
I'm not sure how exactly ORF is used by implementations, is it automatically generated by the router based on what the filtering rules are, or configured a different way? I think the real value would be in having something which has little overhead for the person configuring it as possible, because if an operator needs to generate the ORF to send to peers there's the risk it could diverge from the policy which is used to filter incoming routes, or some runtime check such as RPKI validity failed which caused the route to be rejected. Additionally, I've previously had an issue where the peer accepted a route, but the upstream of a peer rejected it, so it would be useful to be able to check the upstreams of peers acceptance of the routes as well. I can imagine some more complex scenarios where this would be useful too: for example in an anycast deployment where routes from particular PoPs are tagged with a community value, it could be useful to check that a particular route is visible at a particular upstream provider for instance. Thanks, Rayhaan On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 2:00 AM Jakob Heitz (jheitz) <jhe...@cisco.com> wrote: > Rayhaan wanted to know if the peer accepted his route. > A looking glass is a different thing in many ways. > > Several years ago Ignas pointed out that you can use this > information to know whether to install a backup on your > side for the route. Backup routes in the forwarding hardware > are expensive, so it would be good to know if your peer > is using your route before installing a backup for it. > > BGP has a peer-to-peer only signaling mechanism: ORF. > Can we invent an ORF for it? > > Rayhaan, please let me know if I'm on or off track > for your use case. > > Regards, > Jakob. > > -----Original Message----- > From: GROW <grow-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of heasley > Sent: Monday, April 26, 2021 4:23 PM > To: Christopher Morrow <christopher.mor...@gmail.com> > Cc: grow@ietf.org grow@ietf.org <grow@ietf.org> > Subject: Re: [GROW] BGP Looking Glass Capability > > Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 06:25:44PM -0400, Christopher Morrow: > > (as normal netizen) > > > > On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 3:33 PM Randy Bush <ra...@psg.com> wrote: > > > > > > Place LG info in peeringdb.com & peeringdb's api. > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > huh,I had thought this was already actually included in peeringdb? > > <clipped from 7018's page> > > Looking Glass URL http://route-server.ip.att.net > > </clip> > > afict, its just a string, which does not provide a standard way to > represent location/geo. i presume from earlier comments, that something > more structured is desired. > > _______________________________________________ > 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
