IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] Fwd:I-D ACTION:draft-pmohapat-idr-acceptown-community-01.txt

Danny McPherson <danny@tcb.net> Wed, 30 April 2008 23:52 UTC

Return-Path: <idr-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: idr-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-idr-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E62563A6A76; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:52:57 -0700 (PDT)
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 C7DCF3A63EC for <idr@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:52:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.546
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.546 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.053, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 khCCUO+S2Oan for <idr@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:52:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dog.tcb.net (dog.tcb.net [64.78.150.133]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 170263A69A1 for <idr@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:52:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by dog.tcb.net (Postfix, from userid 0) id AE5CE2680D7; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 17:52:58 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.103] (VDSL-151-118-146-11.DNVR.QWEST.NET [151.118.146.11]) (authenticated-user smtp) (TLSv1/SSLv3 AES128-SHA 128/128) by dog.tcb.net with SMTP; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 17:52:58 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from danny@tcb.net)
X-Avenger: version=0.7.8; receiver=dog.tcb.net; client-ip=151.118.146.11; client-port=57364; syn-fingerprint=65535:55:1:64:M1316,N,W3,N,N,T,S; data-bytes=0
Message-Id: <F95B588A-D821-4FFD-BD5F-8A4721FB18A4@tcb.net>
From: Danny McPherson <danny@tcb.net>
To: raszuk@juniper.net
In-Reply-To: <48190119.60705@juniper.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v919.2)
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 17:52:42 -0600
References: <20080425213001.4EB133A69E7@core3.amsl.com> <64E4CA6A-B8E4-4390-BDA6-39EF28E95AEA@tcb.net> <7000E71D8C525042A815432358B2F1240138D45E@paul.adoffice.local.de.easynet.net> <DE879141-E245-4051-A04D-9FF5CF97F892@bgp.nu> <39074353-26E5-4239-A193-E4DD84AE75A0@tcb.net> <014A2382-C5CE-4657-B4DA-FC84D7772359@bgp.nu><4686A93B-EF16-48DC-9775-1BD241575360@tcb.net><4818D897.3070804@cisco.com><DC5EBA07-BBE5-4D6D-9F3E-C40C66ACE34B@tcb.net><4818DB47.8040002@cisco.com><82B7CFF7-86CB-4DC7-BE53-29004128B5CB@tcb.net><4818DCFC.70001@cisco.com> <8D3C8A4B-B80B-4983-8DC7-A142FFA4B41C@tcb.net> <4818ECF1.1030909@juniper.net> <157A9EDC-B512-4C05-A257-72D70DFB44FA@tcb.net> <48190119.60705@juniper.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.919.2)
Cc: idr idr <idr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Fwd:I-D ACTION:draft-pmohapat-idr-acceptown-community-01.txt
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/pipermail/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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: idr-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: idr-bounces@ietf.org

Regarding all your other text, I don't have any new points
to make and haven't changed my position, so I'll avoid
further discussion on that.

> Recently we have had hussars bashing "BGP overload" ... now in 2008
> perhaps we see a new trend "routing hygiene". So can you spell what is
> so unhygienic in this draft ? All points you have brought so far talk
> about solved issue (in the VPN space) if reflecting unneeded routes to
> PEs ... but non of your points refer to this draft. Can you put in
> points how this draft make this any worse ?

It's "be liberal in what you accept, conservative in what you
send", NOT "be liberal in what you send because others
are liberal in what they accept" :-)

I understand the utility of your proposal, I understand why
you selected the mechanism you did.  My concern is that all
these tweaks have system-wide implications, and we all
need to be cognizant of that when proposing solutions to
problems operators have.

-danny







_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
Idr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email