[bmwg] Convergence draft

"Howard C. Berkowitz" <hcb@clark.net> Mon, 16 April 2001 16:15 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id MAA07565 for <bmwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Apr 2001 12:15:08 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA01121; Mon, 16 Apr 2001 12:14:30 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA01092 for <bmwg@ns.ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Apr 2001 12:14:29 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ren-1.cais.net (ren-1.cais.net [205.252.14.76]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id MAA07559 for <bmwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Apr 2001 12:14:29 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [63.216.127.100] (63-216-127-100.sdsl.cais.net [63.216.127.100]) by ren-1.cais.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f3GGEUj34884; Mon, 16 Apr 2001 12:14:31 -0400 (EDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: hcb@pop3.clark.net
Message-Id: <p05001935b700c95c2e1d@[63.216.127.100]>
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2001 12:13:11 -0400
To: bmwg@ietf.org
From: "Howard C. Berkowitz" <hcb@clark.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Subject: [bmwg] Convergence draft
Sender: bmwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: bmwg-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: Benchmarking Methodology Working Group <bmwg.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: bmwg@ietf.org

It may not have been made clear that the revised, jointly authored 
BGP convergence draft (not quite the working group item) is on the 
archive at 
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-berkowitz-bgpcon-01.txt

The team's intention is to split it into two documents that will be 
BMWG work items, one for terminology and one for basic BGP 
convergence test methodology.  If there are comments from the working 
group on the current document, we would certainly appreciate 
receiving them before doing the new versions.

In the long term, we would like to introduce new tasks dealing with 
BGP convergence in the presence of policy constraints, and on the 
interactions of iBGP and AS-wide convergence.  For now, these are 
outside our scope, as is IGP convergence.

Is there any sense in the working group that the terminology document 
should contain any of these additional topics, or strictly be limited 
to eBGP? Future revisions, of course, are always possible.

Howard Berkowitz
Nortel

_______________________________________________
bmwg mailing list
bmwg@ietf.org
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg