Subject: [GROW] Last Call: <draft-ietf-grow-large-communities-usage-05.txt> (Use of BGP Large Communities) to Informational RFC

From: The IESG <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2017 10:13:02 -0700

The IESG has received a request from the Global Routing Operations WG
(grow) to consider the following document:
- 'Use of BGP Large Communities'
  <draft-ietf-grow-large-communities-usage-05.txt> as Informational RFC

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
[email-masked] mailing lists by 2017-04-21. Exceptionally, comments may be
sent to [email-masked] instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

Abstract

   Examples and inspiration for operators to use BGP Large Communities.

This is a document about how to use a new BGP feature (large communities); there are BGP implementations today which support this feature.

The file can be obtained via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-grow-large-communities-usage/

IESG discussion can be tracked via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-grow-large-communities-usage/ballot/

No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.

---

From: "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2017 21:27:33 +0000

Another idr-related document in IETF Last Call.

Please take a look and cc grow on any comments.

Thanks!

Alvaro.

On 4/7/17, 1:13 PM, "IETF-Announce on behalf of The IESG" <[email-masked] on behalf of [email-masked]> wrote:

Abstract

---

From: Jay Borkenhagen <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 09:46:15 -0400

> beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

The following comment may not measure up to being "substantive", but
those in authority can decide.

I have always liked the way the definition of the "BGP Communities
Attribute" spec in RFC1997 was paired with RFC1998's "An Application
of the BGP Community Attribute in Multi-home Routing": the former for
the "bits on the wire" spec, the latter for "how operators can use it."

draft-ietf-grow-large-communities-usage-05.txt's Introduction section
currently reads as follows:

   BGP Large Communities [RFC8092] provide a mechanism to signal
   opaque information between Autonomous Systems (ASs).  This document
   presents examples of how operators might utilize BGP Large
   Communities to achieve various goals.  This document draws on the
   experience of operator communities such as NANOG [1] and NLNOG [2].

I would like to suggest this minor change:

   BGP Large Communities [RFC8092] provide a mechanism to signal
   opaque information between Autonomous Systems (ASs).  In very much
   the same way that [RFC1998] provides a concrete real-world
   application for [RFC1997]'s communities, this document presents
   examples of how operators might utilize BGP Large Communities to
   achieve various goals.  This document draws on the experience of
   operator communities such as NANOG [1] and NLNOG [2].

Thanks for considering, and very belated thanks to Tony and Enke for
RFC1998. 

						Jay B.

---

From: Job Snijders <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 20:31:10 +0200

> Thanks for considering, and very belated thanks to Tony and Enke for

I would not object to this change. After all, the whole idea for
draft-ietf-grow-large-communities-usage originated from the fact that
RFC 1998 exists, so we might as well mention & acknowledge that. :-)

Attached is a HTML diff of what the -06 version would look like. Barring
no objections, I'll post -06 somewhere in the next few days.

Kind regards,

Job