Subject: Re: [bess] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-tunnel-encaps-01.txt

From: Eric C Rosen <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2015 10:20:34 -0500

The -01 revision of draft-ietf-idr-tunnel-encaps has the following 
changes from the -00 revision:

- By popular request, it has been written in such a way as to obsolete 
RFC5512.  This means that anything useful in RFC5512 had to be 
incorporated into the new draft.  I would welcome opinions on whether 
this was done correctly.

- Two new sub-TLVs are specified:  "MPLS Label Stack" and "Prefix-SID".  
I would welcome opinions on whether these are useful or not.  (I'm 
pretty sure that the first is useful, the second is more speculative.)

- If you are familiar with deployed uses of the Encapsulation Extended 
Community, the Color Extended Community, or the Router's MAC Extended 
Community, it may be worth checking section 4 to make sure that the 
draft does not introduce any problems.

- I wish more folks would take a critical look at section 8, which is 
primarily about the use of VXLAN/NVGRE/VXLAN-GPE together with labeled 
address families.

I would also be interested in hearing if anyone has an opinion on the 
utility of using this sort of mechanism to signal IPsec tunnels.  Once 
RFC 5512 is obsoleted, RFC 5566 ("BGP IPsec Tunnel Encapsulation 
Attribute") will need to be revised.  It might be possible to generalize 
that in such a way as to facilitate the secure interconnection of two 
private ASes across the public Internet.  Comments on whether RFC 5566 
takes a reasonable approach would be welcome.