Re: BGP-4+

[Dimitry Haskin <[e-mail]>]

> 
> The expansion of the AS/RD space is an orthogonal issue, and one that is
> far more difficult to achieve in a backward compatible fashion.  I would
> argue that this is beyond the scope of the hack on the table...
> 

1) Is the backward compatibility with BGP4 is really necessary or even useful
   for v6?

2) What are actual benefits and applicability of the proposed multiprotocol
   capabilities of BGP4+?  Can we require that all v6 RD boundaries
   stay the same as the v4 AS boundaries for the proposed scheme to work? 

3) Depending on the answer on 1) and 2), it may be that BGPng don't
   have to be more a hack that BGP4 is, and to this end provide
   a longer term solution that "the hack on the table".

4) Not that I necessary disagree that 2-byte AS space is large enough
   for the time being,  but, if there is any discomfort with that,
   it is a perfect opportunity to use expanded space for v6 (to avoid
   pain later).

Dimitry