Re: [Idr] AD Review of draft-ietf-idr-large-community-09

"Alvaro Retana (aretana)" <aretana@cisco.com> Fri, 02 December 2016 17:43 UTC

Return-Path: <aretana@cisco.com>
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 545301296A5; Fri, 2 Dec 2016 09:43:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -17.417
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.417 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.896, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 dRTGyvZTt925; Fri, 2 Dec 2016 09:43:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.86.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D6EC1270B4; Fri, 2 Dec 2016 09:43:41 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=6528; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1480700621; x=1481910221; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=rwXCvHfghn3bf5qlztZD23zxCTBusEkGnLMauc3GDV8=; b=YeHsni+g3H2KHapdRnF0WptwpjYatdu8rTDoSdz75M2LdMRk+wy2dvdt /ixHEujiUmg0X7ZZlvfhv4BwRlxz0yK9g7ez2uViTzfQKIa/V9xGCimgI gh688feXarY4pT26JB6FZZW/z9O/yWf6UrMplvb3ptwTrgrUNKoI7FzE5 w=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0B2AQB3skFY/5NdJa1cGgEBAQECAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QgBAQEBgnNFAQEBAQEfWoEGB40/lwuPWoUiggaGIgIaggA/FAECAQEBAQEBAWI?= =?us-ascii?q?ohGkBBAEjVgULAgEIQgICAjAlAgQOBRSIUwisQYIpL4sCAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBAQEBAQEBHIY+gX0IglaHTS2CMAWUeoVpAZETCpAvjgCEDAEfN4EZMQEBgyS?= =?us-ascii?q?BfnKHcYENAQEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,287,1477958400"; d="scan'208,217";a="180827216"
Received: from rcdn-core-11.cisco.com ([173.37.93.147]) by rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 02 Dec 2016 17:43:32 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com (xch-aln-003.cisco.com [173.36.7.13]) by rcdn-core-11.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id uB2HhWoN030415 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 2 Dec 2016 17:43:32 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-002.cisco.com (173.36.7.12) by XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com (173.36.7.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Fri, 2 Dec 2016 11:43:32 -0600
Received: from xch-aln-002.cisco.com ([173.36.7.12]) by XCH-ALN-002.cisco.com ([173.36.7.12]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Fri, 2 Dec 2016 11:43:32 -0600
From: "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" <aretana@cisco.com>
To: heasley <heas@shrubbery.net>
Thread-Topic: [Idr] AD Review of draft-ietf-idr-large-community-09
Thread-Index: AQHSTFEplUv+tL/kGUyk1NyWV0fUzaD1S9wA//+zdoA=
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2016 17:43:32 +0000
Message-ID: <EE92A222-EE20-4407-B978-0CE565B69D52@cisco.com>
References: <CE1331E4-3ECA-41D7-801F-05519778E8DA@cisco.com> <20161202171728.GH3403@shrubbery.net>
In-Reply-To: <20161202171728.GH3403@shrubbery.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.1a.0.160910
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.117.15.4]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_EE92A222EE204407B9780CE565B69D52ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/AfszXj-szEp2_9S8v8UXDh0zjJE>
Cc: "idr-chairs@ietf.org" <idr-chairs@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-idr-large-community@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-idr-large-community@ietf.org>, "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Idr] AD Review of draft-ietf-idr-large-community-09
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: Fri, 02 Dec 2016 17:43:44 -0000

On 12/2/16, 12:17 PM, "heasley" <heas@shrubbery.net>; wrote:



Hi!



> Fri, Dec 02, 2016 at 04:04:22AM +0000, Alvaro Retana (aretana):

>

> > C3. In Section 6: s/Global Administrator field MAY contain any value/Global Administrator

> > field may contain any value     That “MAY” is not normative, it is just expressing a fact.

>

> The intent was to indicate to implementers that the field may be of any

> value and therefore should not be constrained.  Is it not then normative?

> or should that be expressed in another manner?



In Section 2, where the Large Community is defined, it already says this: “The Global Administrator field…SHOULD be an Autonomous System Number (ASN).”  The “SHOULD” leaves the door open for it to be anything.



The text above, which comes later, is just repeating the fact already covered in Section 2.



Alvaro.