VPN Prefix Outbound Route Filter (VPN Prefix ORF) for BGP-4
draft-ietf-idr-vpn-prefix-orf-45

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:

Announcement

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-idr-vpn-prefix-orf@ietf.org, idr-chairs@ietf.org, idr@ietf.org, ketant.ietf@gmail.com, keyur@arrcus.com, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, shares@ndzh.com
Subject: Document Action: 'VPN Prefix Outbound Route Filter (VPN Prefix ORF) for BGP-4' to Experimental RFC (draft-ietf-idr-vpn-prefix-orf-45.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'VPN Prefix Outbound Route Filter (VPN Prefix ORF) for BGP-4'
  (draft-ietf-idr-vpn-prefix-orf-45.txt) as Experimental RFC

This document is the product of the Inter-Domain Routing Working Group.

The IESG contact persons are Gunter Van de Velde, Jim Guichard and Ketan
Talaulikar.

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-vpn-prefix-orf/

Ballot Text

Technical Summary

   This draft defines a new type of Outbound Route Filter (ORF), known
   as the Virtual Private Network (VPN) Prefix ORF.  The VPN Prefix ORF
   mechanism is applicable when VPN routes from different Virtual
   Routing and Forwarding (VRF) instances are exchanged through a single
   shared Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) session. The purpose of VPN
   Prefix ORF mechanism is to control the overload of VPN routes based
   on RT. With this mechanism, the overload can be limited within the
   minimum range.

Working Group Summary

   There was some contention with the technical proposal with a split 
   of opinion between WG participants (including operators) on its
   benefits vis-à-vis existing solutions and especially operational
   aspects. The chairs brought about an agreement to progress this 
   proposal as experimental to gain wider implementation and
   deployment feedback before it can be considered for standards track.
   Debates continued about the technical proposals right up to the WGLC
   with the authors incorporating some feedback while some other aspects
   (viz. overload bit, sequence number, RD-based filtering) being retain
   as part of the rough consensus determination.

   There is no threat of an appeal. However, one WG participant has
   expressed disapproval.

Document Quality

   There exists one vendor implementation and another implementation
   in a popular open source implementation which has not been brought
   into the mainstream as yet. The implementations do not cover the
   entire specification and only a subset. Not aware of any deployments.
   Through the discussion in the WG, the document is determined to be 
   not mature enough for standards track and hence publication is sought
   as experimental. Further implementation and more so deployment
   experience will determine progression to standards track with any
   changes, as necessary.

   The document was cross-posted to BESS WG which deals with BGP VPN
   services. It also received early reviews from OPSDIR and SECDIR along
   with RTGDIR.

Personnel

   The Document Shepherd for this document is Keyur Patel. The Responsible
   Area Director is Ketan Talaulikar.

RFC Editor Note