IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: a different proposal for ipv6 in bgp

Tony Li <tli@jnx.com> Tue, 31 December 1996 03:10 UTC

Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa10309; 30 Dec 96 22:10 EST
Received: from merit.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa24267; 30 Dec 96 22:10 EST
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by merit.edu (8.8.4/merit-2.0) id VAA05010 for idr-outgoing; Mon, 30 Dec 1996 21:44:07 -0500 (EST)
Received: from interlock.ans.net (interlock.ans.net [147.225.5.5]) by merit.edu (8.8.4/merit-2.0) with SMTP id VAA05005 for <bgp@merit.edu>; Mon, 30 Dec 1996 21:44:04 -0500 (EST)
Received: by interlock.ans.net id AA24744 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for bgp@ans.net); Mon, 30 Dec 1996 21:44:01 -0500
Received: by interlock.ans.net (Internal Mail Agent-2); Mon, 30 Dec 1996 21:44:01 -0500
Received: by interlock.ans.net (Internal Mail Agent-1); Mon, 30 Dec 1996 21:44:01 -0500
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 18:41:51 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199612310241.SAA17822@chimp.jnx.com>
From: Tony Li <tli@jnx.com>
To: dhaskin@baynetworks.com
Cc: dhaskin@baynetworks.com, bgp@ans.net
In-Reply-To: <2.2c.32.19961231023343.00740e3c@pobox.corpeast.baynetworks.com> (message from Dimitry Haskin on Mon, 30 Dec 1996 21:33:43 -0500)
Subject: Re: a different proposal for ipv6 in bgp
Sender: owner-idr@merit.edu
Precedence: bulk

   It is not my experience (probably mach more limited than yours ;).  I
   guess it depends how extensively a particular ISP uses the
   "administrative filters". 

Agreed.  As this is under human control it's essentially unbounded
anyway...  Sigh. 

Tony

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email