non-zero total path attribute length
Yakov Rekhter <yakov@cisco.com> Mon, 23 December 1996 16:46 UTC
Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa01812; 23 Dec 96 11:46 EST
Received: from merit.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa12339; 23 Dec 96 11:46 EST
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by merit.edu (8.8.4/merit-2.0) id LAA09923
for idr-outgoing; Mon, 23 Dec 1996 11:15:13 -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 LAA09917 for <bgp@merit.edu>;
Mon, 23 Dec 1996 11:15:10 -0500 (EST)
Received: by interlock.ans.net id AA00991
(InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for bgp@ans.net);
Mon, 23 Dec 1996 11:15:09 -0500
Received: by interlock.ans.net (Internal Mail Agent-1);
Mon, 23 Dec 1996 11:15:09 -0500
Message-Id: <199612231615.IAA08327@puli.cisco.com>
To: bgp@ans.net
Subject: non-zero total path attribute length
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 96 08:15:08 PST
From: Yakov Rekhter <yakov@cisco.com>
Sender: owner-idr@merit.edu
Precedence: bulk
Folks, I'd like to poll *the folks who implemented BGP-4* to find whether their implementations could tolerate an UPDATE message with non-zero Total Path Attribute Length, but with no NLRI included (another words, the message contains some of the path attributes, but contains no NLRI at all). Please reply directly to me - I'll summarize the replies and post the summary to the list. Yakov.
- non-zero total path attribute length Yakov Rekhter