Re: [GROW] I-D Action: draft-ietf-grow-wkc-behavior-01.txt

[David Farmer <[e-mail]>]

See inline.

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 4:56 PM Jay Borkenhagen <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hello Grow,
>
> The draft-ietf-grow-wkc-behavior-01.txt posted today makes just a few
> small changes w.r.t. -00:
>
>  https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-grow-wkc-behavior-01.txt
>
> Specifically:
>
> - the Abstract has been adjusted to indicate more clearly what things
>   vendors should do and what things network operators should do.
>
> - some loose wording in the Introduction has been tightened up.
>
> - the Section 6 "Action Items" are clarified similarly to the
>   clarifications in the Abstract.  Also, in response to WGLC comments
>   from David Farmer, a paragraph was added to urge network operators
>   not to depend on any assumed treatment of bgp communities by any
>   neighbor networks: for example, do not assume that your transmitted
>   NO_EXPORT will be honored, unless the neighbor confirms that it will
>   be.
>

Your statement effectively changes the three Well-Known Communities defined
in RFC1997 from "MUST NOT" to "SHOULD NOT". Basically, if you can not rely
on those communities not being stripped then "MUST NOT" is way too strong
of a statement. Maybe formally updating RFC1997 and changing the definition
of the three communities to "SHOULD NOT" is an appropriate addition to this
document.  Also, a meta-data link from RFC1997 to this document seems like
a good idea in general and by effect references in IANA Well-Known
Community Registry to this document as well.

Thanks

-- 
===============================================
David Farmer               Email:[e-mail]
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE        Phone: [phone]
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
===============================================