nanog mailing list archives

Re: Upstream BGP community support


From: Joe Maimon <jmaimon () ttec com>
Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2009 09:45:26 -0500



Joel Jaeggli wrote:
So this questions we have approached from time to time. Is there some
worth to be had in finding some consensus  (assuming such a thing is
possible) on a subset of the features that people use communities for
that could be standardized? particularly in the context of source based
remote triggered blackholing this seemed a like a worthwhile effort.

A standardized set means it can be cooked into documentation, training,
and potentially even products.

it doesn't mean that everyone will enable it, but if they do it would be
nice to agree on some basi grounds rules. it should also be understood
that many if not most localized community signaling uses would remain
localized in terms of their documentation and use.

joel


It might be a holy grail to have it completely automatable, but it would seriously help just to have a couple standard ways to do things published, product support could follow that.

I dont know if communities is really the best thing to keep overloading this way. Whats wrong with dedicating a new attribute for automating policy?



Current thread: