Hi Tobias,
On 03/07/2024 12:11, Tobias Fiebig wrote:
In general, it may improve readability to have a separate sections
for originating NLRI and re-distributing received NLRI
(upstream/downstream).
That would be two sections with one point each, and additional overlap.
I.e., an AS must ensure that the originator is authorized to originate
a redistributed route, while also ensuring to not originate routes the
AS is not authorized to originate.
By keeping it in one section, i.e., 'ensure what you export conforms'
the text also prevents a diffusion in responsibility ("We check what we
originate, but what others originated is their responsibility.")
Can you take a look if the new text addresses your concerns?
Making it explicit that the section covers both originating and
redistributing helps, yes.
I have one comment:
"The AS_PATH of redistributed NLRI MUST NOT violate the valley-free
principle [RFC4012], i.e., [..]"
There are more forms of route leaks than violations of "valley-free".
Also, I noticed the referenced RFC4012 does not actually mention the
term. I think you could remove this part of the bulletpoint, so start
with "The redistributing AS MUST be authorized [..]".
Otherwise, I am happy with the changes in 03.
Kind regards,
Martin
_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
