IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] Revised proposed IDR charter

Danny McPherson <danny@tcb.net> Wed, 03 February 2010 12:14 UTC

Return-Path: <danny@tcb.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 C3EA63A68BE for <idr@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Feb 2010 04:14:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 Ta6UVMbAmU+V for <idr@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Feb 2010 04:14:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dog.tcb.net (dog.tcb.net [64.78.150.133]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02D593A681D for <idr@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Feb 2010 04:14:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: by dog.tcb.net (Postfix, from userid 0) id 427872684E9; Wed, 3 Feb 2010 05:15:22 -0700 (MST)
Received: from [10.0.10.53] (host-135-196-34-178.lines.viateldsl.com [135.196.34.178]) (authenticated-user smtp) (TLSv1/SSLv3 AES128-SHA 128/128) by dog.tcb.net with SMTP; Wed, 03 Feb 2010 05:15:22 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from danny@tcb.net)
X-Avenger: version=0.7.8; receiver=dog.tcb.net; client-ip=135.196.34.178; client-port=59673; syn-fingerprint=65535:44:1:64:M1460,N,W3,N,N,T,S MacOS 10.4.8; data-bytes=0
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Danny McPherson <danny@tcb.net>
In-Reply-To: <695BEC12-16A8-4ED6-AA25-A7608941A360@juniper.net>
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 05:15:18 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <A7E7D8E9-A330-471D-BCBF-2F752BBA79AA@tcb.net>
References: <52635EAD-5E0B-4975-BFA5-B315036F59C8@juniper.net> <1D51EAE9-FBFC-450A-9F95-9932086A667C@tcb.net> <213C5E3B-6E40-4967-A54C-A3408AF881D5@juniper.net> <8A92F9E6-05AE-4E1D-8368-C9B0B113B05F@tcb.net> <695BEC12-16A8-4ED6-AA25-A7608941A360@juniper.net>
To: "John G. Scudder" <jgs@juniper.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077)
Cc: idr List <idr@ietf.org>, "idr-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <idr-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, "idr-ads@tools.ietf.org" <idr-ads@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Revised proposed IDR charter
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
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: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 12:14:40 -0000

On Feb 3, 2010, at 5:02 AM, John G. Scudder wrote:

> On Feb 3, 2010, at 1:59 PM, Danny McPherson wrote:
>> Right, but assumptions about "restricted environments" and 
>> "correct deployment" in a global routing system protocol 
>> often results in negative systemic effects.  We've seen this 
>> several times already with 32-bit ASNs.  
> 
> Can you be more specific?  The 32-bit ASN issues I can think of were software bugs, not deployment issues.

Fair point..  I just believe that, as you stated in another email, 
if "maximizing global connectivity" is a goal, then defining extensions 
that allow for software bugs to introduce systemic instability, or 
require "correct deployment", or that deployment be scoped to "restricted 
environments", this makes me uneasy.

Then again, perhaps I'm just being overly apprehensive.  I've 
stated my concerns...

-danny

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email