Re: [Bgp-autoconf] Progress report of design team on IDR virtual meeting

All,

I completely agree with Randy on this part:

" None of these example attributes are requirements, will be specified, given
code points, etc. in the protocol design."

On the rest I would actually go even further and say that such things
should be out of scope of pure and simple auto discovery.

Reason being that once you open a trunk - even if originally empty or
containing only spare tire - folks will load it with junk
beyond imagination making the interop nightmare, opportunity to keep old
mantra alive fix one bug intro two etc ...

And as I said in the other note - some of this stuff being proposed should
be transitive and IMHO belongs in BGP not in autodiscovery.

Thx

On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 11:38 PM Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:

> jimmy,
>
> my apologies for my poor communication.  let me try with text
>
>   Two prospective peers SHOULD be able to exchange arbitrary attributes
>   to communicate things such as position or role in a topology, link
>   speeds and/or loading, preferred time of day, favorite ice cream, etc.
>   None of these example attributes are requirements, will be specified,
>   given code points, etc. in the protocol design.  But there SHOULD be a
>   protocol provision for communicating arbitrary attributes so that the
>   operator may configure as needed for their environment.
>
> hope that helps.
>
> randy
>
>
> --
> Bgp-autoconf mailing list
> Bgp-autoconf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bgp-autoconf
>