Subject: Re: [Idr] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-bgp-extended-messages-33: (with COMMENT)
From: Alvaro Retana <[email-masked]>
To: Susan Hares <[email-masked]>, "Enke Chen (enkechen)" <[email-masked]>, Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Cc: Mirja Kühlewind via Datatracker <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], The IESG <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 13:05:56 -0700
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>

Sue:

I think that this point was addressed in this thread [1], but I will send a
message to the WG to confirm.

It is good that we cross all our Ts Extended Message is an important change
to BGP.

Thanks!

Alvaro.

P.S.  BTW, we (me included) should probably not keep hijacking this thread
to address additional points. :-)

On July 31, 2019 at 1:31:11 PM, Susan Hares ([email-masked]) wrote:

Just to let you know that the text below:

“A peer which does not advertise this capability MUST NOT send BGP

   Extended Messages, and BGP Extended Messages MUST NOT be sent to it.”

was added due to comments on the IDR WG list from reviewers and operators.