IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] WGLC on draft-ietf-idr-as-private-reservation-00

Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li> Fri, 30 November 2012 15:53 UTC

Return-Path: <tony.li@tony.li>
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 81B4F21F8B54 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 07:53:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.437
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.437 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id omJaiDHThmsJ for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 07:53:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from qmta01.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (qmta01.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe2d:43:76:96:30:16]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A98D21F8B48 for <idr@ietf.org>; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 07:52:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from omta23.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.90]) by qmta01.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id VqBZ1k00G1wfjNsA1rst2V; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 15:52:53 +0000
Received: from sjc-vpn7-1354.cisco.com ([128.107.239.233]) by omta23.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id Vrqd1k00g52qHCY8jrqgog; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 15:50:51 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\))
From: Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>
In-Reply-To: <CAL9jLab4WZa-QA2pwhD7cuCk8iNca3xSUeJkQDxJyy4dS37WSg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 07:50:37 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <9DCD1872-F11D-4B08-9B0B-834C05D7D0FF@tony.li>
References: <B6B72499-E9D0-4281-84EB-6CA53694866E@juniper.net> <D704E7E3-3A95-4696-9757-9E17605E670C@tony.li> <378E396E-3F4B-4ACC-83D1-C4931524FECD@puck.nether.net> <CA+b+ERneavhy1gzKRSnCfN+YjYcU0+3WgBg6f68gq=tpx8yV5g@mail.gmail.com> <1AC79BDA-C088-47B4-888D-4B0428FB7C4F@puck.nether.net> <B549F708-0D5E-4B22-AC91-B6CE61B258FE@tony.li> <CAL9jLaZdX_jem0JdSGHzuhc3GDZXMDR0kvMKq5xr3D-EWYbNVQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+b+ER=rL6WAMuu5cJUQk94ObUrhKKgmiNuxRhMGJbavCg6S3A@mail.gmail.com> <CAL9jLaa27PZwa+fj_okSHTjjnxQeR8q67Nb5V0aYKOBbqcHtjQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+b+ERnBAOU5sbtjnPcfzmw2ieu7UPEXWbGCpsY=5hcfSUToFg@mail.gmail.com> <CAL9jLab4WZa-QA2pwhD7cuCk8iNca3xSUeJkQDxJyy4dS37WSg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20121106; t=1354290773; bh=o1Ean2+CupMh/qL0IbGeBbUk0yqRCxugdZ68hVxhR74=; h=Received:Received:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:Date: Message-Id:To; b=pUBXZAaipXe8QiV3ejAzyg02PHUAGYIBFDPs3y1jpX8ztrR8ocdCwnCNCMsXp5iAF 4c60cNbqVnkW9lz/VMeknzN3tKmQobQ8zDoUH+8EF0n0QMFzfHZE8s2NMOffAAK8h4 p+PRYhQqNo3LJG3IOTgcYG9piRPzdosokS/p1ETSRnd5XAY/HN1YSgNmcc4ZFW2bmq OLLsN9qwm4XBKI/wuYaJCWzTc1DJFWlyHUB7B7p2EM88QqW13UY8pDzNazyuXB1xVA wvwAvy6OMf+aWs7adD6ZZpiJSoVpq7R09PALWIRzvRAN1XfZakbEKZsMc8Ml2dzOIq eT4M8pvYsVdlQ==
Cc: idr wg <idr@ietf.org>, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Subject: Re: [Idr] WGLC on draft-ietf-idr-as-private-reservation-00
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <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: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 15:53:12 -0000

On Nov 30, 2012, at 7:36 AM, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 3:58 AM, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> wrote:
>> Adding new #define range to check when some filtering policy is
>> enabled seems to me like not even in the white noise level as compared
>> with things which BGP is carrying today and perhaps will carry
>> tomorrow.
> 
> by all means, once the floodgates are open, why not drive the valdez
> through the shoals.


Come now.  This is not a reasonable comparison in so many ways.  The floodgates are not open and this hardly a large issue.

The exception is already in the code for one range.  The issue here is simply adding another range.

There is ample demand for doing this, it's simply not represented by the SP community.  Thus, I suspect that the code will change for commercial reasons alone.  The remaining question is whether you want it standardized or not.

Tony

v2.31.3 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status