Return-Path: 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 4767F12B243 for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2016 08:12:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.217 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.217 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.316, 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 dhktrJ0kwHC7 for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2016 08:11:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slice.pfrc.org (slice.pfrc.org [67.207.130.108]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3678F12B223 for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2016 08:11:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dresden.attlocal.net (99-59-193-67.lightspeed.livnmi.sbcglobal.net [99.59.193.67]) by slice.pfrc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6AC701E1DA; Tue, 27 Sep 2016 11:13:30 -0400 (EDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_03CC266C-DDAA-4164-A4B4-B6944197B058" From: Jeffrey Haas In-Reply-To: <20160927145841.GF64449@Vurt.local> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 11:11:54 -0400 Message-Id: <896828B2-039A-48AC-9A16-23F26AF35643@pfrc.org> References: <43B423F6-E214-402D-BB29-99C062C46363@juniper.net> <20160924092657.GE1603@Vurt.local> <20160926211852.GL3036@Hanna.local> <20160927082443.GI1558@Vurt.local> <20160927145841.GF64449@Vurt.local> To: Job Snijders X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104) Archived-At: Cc: In-Depth Review Subject: Re: [Idr] WG adoption of draft-heitz-idr-large-community; one week to comment on early code point allocation X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 15:12:00 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_03CC266C-DDAA-4164-A4B4-B6944197B058 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > On Sep 27, 2016, at 10:58 AM, Job Snijders wrote: >=20 > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 10:31:45AM -0400, Jeffrey Haas wrote: >>> On Sep 27, 2016, at 4:24 AM, Job Snijders wrote: >>>=20 >>> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 07:31:57PM -0400, Jeffrey Haas wrote: >>>> FWIW, I think things with "well known" semantics should stick to = the >>>> reserved code point space in 1997 communities unless there's some >>>> motivation to have a common parameter/argument in it. In that = case, >>>> it fits the case for large comms anyway. >>>=20 >>> I agree with you Jeff.=20 >>>=20 >>> How about the following: >>>=20 >>> """ >>> The Large Community attribute values in the following ranges are >>> reserved: >>>=20 >>> 0:0:0 - 0:4294967295:4294967295 >>> 4294967295:0:0 - 4294967295:4294967295:4294967295 >>>=20 >>> """ >>>=20 >>> This way the lowest and highest possible value are reserved, and at = some >>> later point (part of) these reserved ranges could be converted to >>> Well-known or something else if that need arises. >>=20 >> I'm fine with such a reservation. However, it'd be good to get the >> reasoning in the doc rather than letting it be inferred after the >> fact. >=20 > Thank you for your feedback. >=20 > Would you be willing to (unicast) a couple of sentences to describe = why > 0 and 2^32-1 are special? https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-haas-code-point-reservation-bcp-02 = The above draft got quite a bit of feedback from a few individuals with = MUCH stronger opinions than I did as to how to write recommendations. = However, the document captures my own opinions. This doesn't answer your specific request, but at least gives you an = idea of my thinking. -- Jeff --Apple-Mail=_03CC266C-DDAA-4164-A4B4-B6944197B058 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
On Sep 27, 2016, at 10:58 AM, Job Snijders <job@ntt.net> = wrote:

On = Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 10:31:45AM -0400, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
On Sep 27, 2016, at 4:24 AM, Job Snijders <job@ntt.net> wrote:

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 07:31:57PM -0400, = Jeffrey Haas wrote:
FWIW, I think things with "well known" semantics should stick = to the
reserved code point space in 1997 communities = unless there's some
motivation to have a common = parameter/argument in it.  In that case,
it fits the = case for large comms anyway.

I = agree with you Jeff.

How about the = following:

"""
=   The Large Community attribute values in the following ranges = are
  reserved:

=            0:0:0 = - =          0:4294967295:4294967= 295
  4294967295:0:0 - = 4294967295:4294967295:4294967295

"""

This way the lowest and highest possible value = are reserved, and at some
later point (part of) these = reserved ranges could be converted to
Well-known or = something else if that need arises.

I'm fine with such a reservation. However, it'd be good to = get the
reasoning in the doc rather than letting it be = inferred after the
fact.

Thank you for your feedback.

Would= you be willing to (unicast) a couple of sentences to describe why
0 and 2^32-1 are special?


The above draft got quite = a bit of feedback from a few individuals with MUCH stronger opinions = than I did as to how to write recommendations.  However, the = document captures my own opinions.

This doesn't answer your specific request, but at = least gives you an idea of my thinking.

-- Jeff

= --Apple-Mail=_03CC266C-DDAA-4164-A4B4-B6944197B058--