Re: [Idr] Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-pmohapat-idr-acceptown-community-01.txt

["John G. Scudder" <jgs at juniper.net>]

Jeff,

On May 6, 2008, at 3:46 PM, Jeffrey Haas wrote:

> I still recommend to the authors that they don't consider a well-known
> standard community.  Please consider either using a new extended
> community

That would be your earlier suggestion:

> 2. A new version of the route-target extended community that has the
> "accept this with your own originator" semantics.

That would work and I don't have a huge problem with it, but I don't  
see how it's semantically different from the current proposal.  In the  
current proposal, we decompose things orthogonally into the routing  
table context of the route (the route target) and the handling of the  
route (the ACCEPT_OWN community).  What you describe above combines  
those two semantics into a single new-type route target, but otherwise  
would seem to be the same.

> or adding a configuration knob for the existing route-target
> community.

And that would be:

> 1. Add a configuration knob that says "accept this route with
> route-target and ignore originator".

If you mean "add a configuration knob on the PE" then that wouldn't  
satisfy the use case requirements, which is exactly to avoid  
configuration on PEs.  Maybe you could describe in a few more words  
exactly what the knob you're imagining would do.

> I think that would serve your requirements without otherwise
> complicating existing non-VPN situations.

I don't think non-VPN situations are complicated at all since you  
wouldn't turn the feature on -- modulo the comment others have made  
that there would necessarily some code introduced to support this  
feature even if it wasn't configured.  But some code would be  
introduced in either of the approaches you suggest as well, so that  
can't be what you mean.

By the way -- you specifically say "don't consider a well-known  
standard community".  Does that mean you wouldn't have a problem with  
a well-known *extended* community (without RT semantics of its own)?   
If so, how come?

Thanks,

--John
_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
Idr at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr