1. Redistribution of Cooperative Filtering Information draft-py-idr-redisfilter-01.txt Michel Py, L3T Jeroen Massar, SixXS Rob Thomas, Team Cymru William Leibzon, Elan Networks

2. IETF-58 Minneapolis - Thursday November 13,2003 draft-py-idr-redisfilter-01.txtIDR WG 2 Goals of this presentation: Clarify the objectives. Acquire a feeling of the WG’s thoughts about the concept. Answer questions about the mechanism. The draft is exploratory and possibly too detailed; we know it, we welcome the WG’s feedback on what needs to be removed / rewritten.

3. IETF-58 Minneapolis - Thursday November 13,2003 draft-py-idr-redisfilter-01.txtIDR WG 3 What this draft is not: An attempt to standardize bogon filtering. What this draft is: A mechanism to distribute filtering information. Bogon filtering is only one example of filtering information. The objective is to standardize the mechanism. Idea: re-use ORF mechanisms. The ORF specifications are not modified; what is required is a syntax enhancement that is mostly a matter of implementation.

4. IETF-58 Minneapolis - Thursday November 13,2003 draft-py-idr-redisfilter-01.txtIDR WG 4 In complement of: router BGP 65001 neighbor bogonserver remote-as 65000 neighbor bogonserver capability orf prefix-list send We also want the capability to do this: router BGP 65001 neighbor bogonserver remote-as 65000 neighbor bogonserver capability orf prefix-list send THEIRBOGONS Which is: naming the filtering object received from the peer

5. IETF-58 Minneapolis - Thursday November 13,2003 draft-py-idr-redisfilter-01.txtIDR WG 5 The "THEIRBOGONS" object is the ORF information received from the peer. The reason we want to name it is because we want to reuse the "THEIRBOGONS" object in other parts of the router's configuration (for other peers). The object received from the peer may or may not be a prefix-list; it can be an as-path or any future ORF object.

6. IETF-58 Minneapolis - Thursday November 13,2003 draft-py-idr-redisfilter-01.txtIDR WG 6 Open mike: Questions ? Suggestions ? Issues ? Interactions between ORF and iBGP; are there any issues with full meshes, route reflectors and confederations? If the ORF object received from the peer is named, should the object not be applied automatically to the peer it was received from?

7. draft-py-idr-redisfilter-01.txtIDR WG Thank you for you attention Michel Py, L3T michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us Jeroen Massar, SixXS jeroen@unfix.org Rob Thomas, Team Cymru robt@cymru.com William Leibzon, Elan Networks william@elan.net IETF-58 Minneapolis - Thursday November 13,20037