IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] WG adoption of draft-heitz-idr-large-community; one week to comment on early code point allocation

Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> Sat, 24 September 2016 13:00 UTC

Return-Path: <nick@foobar.org>
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 5183D12BB15 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 24 Sep 2016 06:00:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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 h3VccW-S4M86 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 24 Sep 2016 06:00:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.netability.ie (mail.netability.ie [IPv6:2a03:8900:0:100::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5F26D12BAD2 for <idr@ietf.org>; Sat, 24 Sep 2016 06:00:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Envelope-To: idr@ietf.org
Received: from cupcake.local (089-101-070074.ntlworld.ie [89.101.70.74] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.netability.ie (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id u8OD0EMb027226 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 24 Sep 2016 14:00:15 +0100 (IST) (envelope-from nick@foobar.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: cheesecake.ibn.ie: Host 089-101-070074.ntlworld.ie [89.101.70.74] (may be forged) claimed to be cupcake.local
Message-ID: <57E678DD.2020304@foobar.org>
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2016 14:00:13 +0100
From: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
User-Agent: Postbox 4.0.8 (Macintosh/20151105)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Job Snijders <job@ntt.net>
References: <43B423F6-E214-402D-BB29-99C062C46363@juniper.net> <20160924092657.GE1603@Vurt.local>
In-Reply-To: <20160924092657.GE1603@Vurt.local>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/QIyMp8md7SSquIgUykZM3-DEYog>
Cc: I Don't Remember <idr@ietf.org>
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 <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Sat, 24 Sep 2016 13:00:21 -0000

Job Snijders wrote:
> 3) Should values in the range "65535:0:0 - 65535:4294967295:4294967295" be
>    reserved to accomodate any future well known communities? 65535 is
>    used in RFC1997 so i see merit in continuing to use that number.

It's taken us 20 years to reach 14 well-known communities in the rfc1997
WKC registry.  Extrapolating this out, this should give us enough bit
space for all requirements for the next ~100,000 years, at which point
I'd be happy to see the IDR working group re-opening discussion on the
issue.

In the interim, there are sound reasons for not duplicating WKCs in
another number space, e.g. precedence, vendor bugs, unnecessary
complication, additional overhead, etc.

Nick

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email