IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: ASN draft

Paul Traina <pst@cisco.com> Tue, 07 February 1995 19:03 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa05660; 7 Feb 95 14:03 EST
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa05656; 7 Feb 95 14:03 EST
Received: from interlock.ans.net by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa10679; 7 Feb 95 14:03 EST
Received: by interlock.ans.net id AA56933 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 1.1 for iwg-out@ans.net); Tue, 7 Feb 1995 13:51:10 -0500
Received: by interlock.ans.net (Internal Mail Agent-2); Tue, 7 Feb 1995 13:51:10 -0500
Received: by interlock.ans.net (Internal Mail Agent-1); Tue, 7 Feb 1995 13:51:10 -0500
Message-Id: <199502071851.KAA20964@feta.cisco.com>
X-Authentication-Warning: feta.cisco.com: Host localhost.cisco.com didn't use HELO protocol
To: bmanning@isi.edu
Cc: Sean Doran <smd@cesium.clock.org>, bgp@ans.net, jhawk@panix.com, tony@mci.net
Subject: Re: ASN draft
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 07 Feb 1995 09:19:22 PST." <199502071719.AA04467@zed.isi.edu>
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 1995 10:51:01 -0800
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Paul Traina <pst@cisco.com>

  From: bmanning@ISI.EDU
  Subject: Re: ASN draft
  
  So when are you releasing the BGP5s draft?
  And should I also expect to see the BGP5m, BGP5a etc drafts?
  This is sounding like propritary protocols to me.

BGP is extensible.  BGP enhancements are only as proprietary as their authors
want them to be.  *We* -want- to publish enhancements to the protocol when
they're required.  We hate bogus enhancements, but when there's no other
choice, we're going to make them to solve our customers problems.

If you, or other BGP implementors don't want to implement them, then that's
your choice.  Thanks for playing, have a nice day. :-)

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email