Subject: [Idr] WG Adoption call for drafts for Flow Specification option 1 (RFC5575 additions (filters/actions) 3/25 to 4/8/2016

From: "Susan Hares" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 10:47:14 -0400

IDR WG: 

This begins a 2 week WG Call (3/25 to 4/8/2016) for the set of drafts to be
considered in RFC5575 additions. These options are filters, actions or
critical security additions.  The flow specification work has been a part of
the interims since IETF 94

https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/interim/2016/02/08/idr/proceedings.html

https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/interim/2016/03/07/idr/proceedings.html

There will be a brief flow specification presentation at IETF 95, and the
email list has select to start with option 1 - extending RFC5575.  We also
will be gathering details on the SDN/NFV use case for option 2 (new NLRI and
Wide Communities support). 

This is a group call for the drafts to be considered in the flow
specification work.  For each of the drafts you wish to be considered Option
1, please indicate: 

1)      If this option is valuable for the DDoS deployments or another
critical deployments,  

2)      Do you feel this draft is useful, but not ready for adoption, 

3)      Do you feel this draft is a good start for this work. 

The drafts to consider are: 

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-eddy-idr-flowspec-packet-rate/

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hao-idr-flowspec-nvo3/

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hao-idr-flowspec-redirect-tunnel/

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-idr-flowspec-redirect-generalized-
sid/

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-liang-idr-bgp-flowspec-label/

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-litkowski-idr-flowspec-interfaceset/

<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-idr-flowspec-redirect-generalized
-sid/>
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-vandevelde-idr-flowspec-path-redirect
/

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-yong-idr-flowspec-mpls-match/

And for the ordering of these filters and actions drafts - the Option 1
section out of this 

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hares-idr-flowspec-combo/

(A revised draft with just Option 1 will be posted) 

Sue Hares and John Scudder

---

From: "Mohammed Mirza (mohamirz)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 18:22:05 +0000

Hi, Sue, John,

Support: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-vandevelde-idr-flowspec-path-redirect/

I support the above draft that proposes use of a newly defined BGP extended Indirection_ID community. This new ext-comm looks like a good alternate to the "redirect-to-VRF" action for redirecting traffic towards an alternate destination and thus facilitating policy-based forwarding defined in flow-spec standard RFC5575.

Thanks,
Mohammed

From: Idr <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> on behalf of Susan Hares <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Date: Friday, March 25, 2016 at 7:47 AM
To: "'idr@ietf. org'" <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Subject: [Idr] WG Adoption call for drafts for Flow Specification option 1 (RFC5575 additions (filters/actions) 3/25 to 4/8/2016

IDR WG:

This begins a 2 week WG Call (3/25 to 4/8/2016) for the set of drafts to be considered in RFC5575 additions. These options are filters, actions or critical security additions.  The flow specification work has been a part of the interims since IETF 94
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/interim/2016/02/08/idr/proceedings.html
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/interim/2016/03/07/idr/proceedings.html

There will be a brief flow specification presentation at IETF 95, and the email list has select to start with option 1 - extending RFC5575.  We also will be gathering details on the SDN/NFV use case for option 2 (new NLRI and Wide Communities support).

This is a group call for the drafts to be considered in the flow specification work.  For each of the drafts you wish to be considered Option 1, please indicate:

1)      If this option is valuable for the DDoS deployments or another critical deployments,

The drafts to consider are:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-eddy-idr-flowspec-packet-rate/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hao-idr-flowspec-nvo3/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hao-idr-flowspec-redirect-tunnel/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-idr-flowspec-redirect-generalized-sid/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-liang-idr-bgp-flowspec-label/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-litkowski-idr-flowspec-interfaceset/
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-idr-flowspec-redirect-generalized-sid/>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-vandevelde-idr-flowspec-path-redirect/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-yong-idr-flowspec-mpls-match/

And for the ordering of these filters and actions drafts - the Option 1 section out of this
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hares-idr-flowspec-combo/
(A revised draft with just Option 1 will be posted)

---

From: "Russ White" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 14:53:32 -0400

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-eddy-idr-flowspec-packet-rate/

Support -- seems useful for DDoS protection.

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hao-idr-flowspec-nvo3/

Support.

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-idr-flowspec-redirect-general

Support.

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-liang-idr-bgp-flowspec-label/

Support.

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-litkowski-idr-flowspec-interface

Support.

> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-idr-flowspec-redirect-genera
> lized-sid/>

Support.

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-vandevelde-idr-flowspec-path-redi
> rect/

Support.

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-yong-idr-flowspec-mpls-match/

Support.

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hao-idr-flowspec-redirect-tunnel

This one seems a little dangerous to me... Do we have actual use cases for
this? What protection would there be against forming permanent, stable,
routing loops when using this -- which would be particularly bad in the case
of copied packets looping back to the point of copy, and being recopied? I
guess there's always TTL, but... This one I would need to think about more
before supporting in full.

/R

---

From: "Dongling Duan (duan)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 19:12:10 +0000

Support

 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-vandevelde-idr-flowspec-path-redirect/

Dongling duan
Thx

IDR WG: