Ballot for draft-ietf-grow-large-communities-usage
Yes
No Objection
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 07 and is now closed.
So this is basically for attaching arbitrary tags to BGP routes? Privacy Considerations probably need to be added to this document.
Introduction BGP Large Communities [RFC8092] provide a mechanism to signal opaque information between Autonomous Systems (ASs). Not only "between": BGP communities might also be used inside an AS, as you described in the "informational communities" As mentioned by Jouni in his OPS-DIR review: One minor nit I have relates to management & administration to the large communities functions and description of their semantics. Are those maintained somewhere? If there are existing repositories, documentation, etc it would be nice to point out those. The document now hints to NANOG and NLNOG..
Thanks for addressing the SecDir review (and GenArt). https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/T4xX2o_TrMIRVQ1Z2u25wGvxR0U
Overall the document was well written and easy to read. I did have one question though. It is not clear how the values for the Local data part 1 are matched up to the functions and communicated between the peer ASes? Is this going to stay purely a local matter between ASes or is there going to be a movement towards some sets of known functions (e.g. the BGP blackhole community RFC7999)?