IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-large-community-01.txt

Jared Mauch <jared@puck.Nether.net> Mon, 03 October 2016 14:15 UTC

Return-Path: <jared@puck.nether.net>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D22112B302 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Oct 2016 07:15:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.198
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.198 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.996, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HSr19MadbGpf for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Oct 2016 07:15:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from puck.nether.net (puck.nether.net [IPv6:2001:418:3f4::5]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09B1312B333 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Oct 2016 07:14:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by puck.nether.net (Postfix, from userid 162) id 94B0D5407E1; Mon, 3 Oct 2016 10:14:10 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2016 10:14:10 -0400
From: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.Nether.net>
To: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
Message-ID: <20161003141409.GA18150@puck.nether.net>
References: <147531113077.4216.12599976309263776317.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <20161001085434.GW20697@Vurt.local> <005b01d21d58$aaf869e0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <20161003095936.GC20697@Vurt.local> <04cf01d21d68$52c656a0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <57F243E9.3010902@foobar.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <57F243E9.3010902@foobar.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.0 (2016-08-17)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/3Bew_YTh_JpK71rfrOsDWCqD_kM>
Cc: idr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-large-community-01.txt
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2016 14:15:20 -0000

On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 12:41:29PM +0100, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> t.petch wrote:
> > Well, Bertrand Duvivier seemed to be proposing something along these
> > lines last week, and I for one would see a mapping from old protocol to
> > new protocol as very much is scope for the new protocol I-D, if only to
> > say there is none.
> 
> creating a mapping between 1997 and large does very little in practice,
> except to increase complexity.  Certainly it doesn't make 1997 community
> support any more or less available.  I'd be in favour of not having any
> mapping between the two

	I don't think any mapping is a protocol-level thing, it's something
providers may decide to do internally, just like supporting any other protocol
extensions, eg: multicast nlri, flowspec, 2547-vpn, etc.

	Some may, others amy decide not to.

	- jared

-- 
Jared Mauch  | pgp key available via finger from jared@puck.nether.net
clue++;      | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/  My statements are only mine.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email