[Idr] draft-rosen-idr-aigp-00

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Tue, 24 March 2009 16:13 UTC

Return-Path: <robert@raszuk.net>
X-Original-To: idr@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA68D3A6D37 for <idr@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 09:13:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id x+FgfmlN9Xx0 for <idr@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 09:13:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail37.opentransfer.com (mail37.opentransfer.com [76.162.254.37]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id DD5783A6D36 for <idr@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 09:13:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 19142 invoked by uid 399); 24 Mar 2009 16:14:32 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.100?) (83.5.242.169) by mail37.opentransfer.com with SMTP; 24 Mar 2009 16:14:32 -0000
Message-ID: <49C906E6.9030904@raszuk.net>
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 09:14:30 -0700
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: idr <idr@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-2"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Idr] draft-rosen-idr-aigp-00
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: robert@raszuk.net
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 16:13:42 -0000

All,

I would like to support the suggestion made yesterday by Enke Chen, 
Keyur Patel and Danny which suggested to make a good analysis for using 
MED + Cost Community which are an already existing tools to achieve the 
same functionality as the draft proposed via a definition of a new AIGP 
attribute.

In fact the problem described in the draft is a very good example where 
practical problem can be solved using the above two solutions combined 
together.

It can be a very good motivation for restarting work on cost community 
itself which were last posted draft-retana-bgp-custom-decision-00. There 
are apparently practical cases which this draft has a potential to solve 
and IMHO there is a saving to implement something once and then reuse 
for various applications as opposed to implementing separate attributes 
which would at the end result in more burden to BGP and deployment 
difficulties.

Cheers,
R.