Re: revised draft of BGP-4

[Paul Traina <[e-mail]>]

There's no need to actually specify that case, it's already covered by
what isn't prohibited.

However, if you can come up with the actual wordsmithing necessary, we can
all chat about it some more.

  From: Vadim Antonov <[e-mail]>
  Subject: Re:  revised draft of BGP-4
  Yakov -- may i request addition of the sentence explicitly
  permitting replicated AS-numbers (i.e. as-paths like
  
  	777 4000 4000 4000 1239 251
  
  )
  
  This feature is actively used now to balance lengths of AS-paths
  without using extra AS-numbers.
  
  I.e. BGP speakers should not interpret routes with paths like that
  as erroneous.
  
  Thanks!
  
  --vadim
  
  Folks,
  
  Today I sent to CNRI a revised version of BGP-4 spec.
  
  The only difference between this version and the current protocol spec
  (other than changing dates and my affiliation) are the following two
  paragraphs:
  
  
  First paragraph:
  
  	If the OPEN message carries any other Optional Parameter (other than Au
>>thentication
  	Information), and the local system doesn't recognize the Parameter, the
  	Parameter shall be ignored.
  
  Second paragraph:
  
  	The information carried by the AS_PATH attribute is checked for
  	AS loops. AS loop detection is done by scanning the full AS path
  	(as specified in the AS_PATH attribute), and checking that the
  	autonomous system number of the local system does not appear
  	in the AS path. If the autonomous system number appears in the AS path
  	the route may be stored in the Adj-RIB-In, but unless the router is
  	configured to accept routes with its own autonomous system in the AS pa
>>th, 
  	the route shall not be passed to the BGP Decision Process. 
  	Operations of a router that is configured to accept routes with its own
>> autonomous
  	system number in the AS path are outside the scope of this document.
  
  
  Please comment on this document as soon as possible, since we are planning to
>> advance
  the document to a Full Standard at the Stockholm IETF.
  
  Thanks.
  
  Yakov Rekhter ([e-mail])