Hi all,
There are, of course, differences between different uses of BGP policy knobs.
Route filters to prevent or reduce the impact of mistakes is different from external control of routing for specific prefixes.
Something to remember is that it is often really valuable from a performance perspective to localpref prefixes learned from R&E peers higher than commodity....but that works better in conjunction with prefix filters that prevent mistakes.
ESnet does this today.
I consider this to be both best practice and critical for supporting data-intensive science. If we are going to issue BGP best practice guidance to the community at large, I recommend we include this.
Eli
Eli Dart, Network Engineer NOC: (510) 486-7600 ESnet Science Engagement Group (800) 333-7638 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 2:22 PM Dale W. Carder dwcarder@es.net wrote:
At first blush it's not a bad idea. We defined something slightly similar in LHCONE for informational communities, but they were not routinely implemented: https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/LHCONE/LhcOneVRF#BGP_communities
Of course we should be aware that use of communities in completely unauthenticated, so the set of actions exposed by any given network should be rather limited.
Dale
Thus spake David Farmer (farmer@umn.edu) on Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 03:24:37PM -0500:
I had a thought.
Does GREN or GNA-G have an ASN? If not we/it could probably get one.
My suggestion would be to use that ASN for a set of globally agreed to communities and to create an as-set that represents the entirety of the Global NREN community.
Thanks
On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 9:38 AM Steven Wallace ssw@internet2.edu wrote:
On 2 Apr 2024, at 10:33, Dale W. Carder wrote:
Thus spake Steven Wallace (ssw@internet2.edu) on Mon, Apr 01, 2024
at
11:49:09AM -0400:
Dave,
I’ll update the document to be clearer. I’m suggesting that AS11537:AS-NREN-PEERS contains the ASNs of Internet2’s NREN peers,
not
their
customer cones. For example, AS11537:AS-NREN-PEERS would contain
AS20965
(GEANT), among others. It wouldn’t contain AS20965:AS-CUSTOMERS or AS20965:AS-NREN-PEERS.
What would be the use case for documenting that particularly in RPSL?
Dale
[Not an RPSL expert] For example, if an NREN that peers with Internet2 wishes to use the as-cone of Internet2 AND the as-cones of the NRENs Internet2 provides transit as a basis for a prefix filter. Am I
thinking
about this incorrectly?
--
David Farmer Email:farmer@umn.edu Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815 Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952 ===============================================
Routing-wg mailing list -- routing-wg@lists.gna-g.net To unsubscribe send an email to routing-wg-leave@lists.gna-g.net