Re: [Idr] WG adoption for draft-kumari-deprecate-as-set-confed-set

I support adoption of this document.

пт, 16 авг. 2019 г. в 17:53, Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>:

> I would also like to support adoption of this.
>
> We should also (in parallel) reach out to some of the networks still using
> as_sets that are visible in the global BGP table.
>
> - Jared
>
> > On Aug 16, 2019, at 10:37 AM, Job Snijders <job@ntt.net> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Susan,
> >
> > I would like to see the WG adopt this draft.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Job
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 10:34:10AM -0400, Susan Hares wrote:
> >> Greetings:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> This begins a 2 week WG adoption call for
> >> draft-kumari-deprecate-as-set-confed-set
> >>
> >> from 8/16 to 8/30/2019.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> This draft seeks to remove AS_SET and AS_CONFED_SET from RFC4271.
> >>
> >> Draft is at:
> >>
> >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kumari-deprecate-as-set-confed-set-14
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> To quote the draft:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>   "BCP 172 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp172>  [RFC6472
> >> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6472> ] makes a recommendation for not
> using
> >> AS_SET and
> >>   AS_CONFED_SET in Border Gateway Protocol (BGP).  This document
> >>   advances the recommendation to a standards requirement in BGP"
> >>
> >>        [aka RFC4271].
> >>
> >>
> >>   "From analysis of past Internet routing data, it is apparent that
> >>   aggregation that involves AS_SETs is very seldom used in practice on
> >>   the public Internet [Analysis
> >> <
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kumari-deprecate-as-set-confed-set-14#ref
> >> -Analysis> ] and when it is used, it is often used
> >>   incorrectly -- reserved AS numbers ([RFC1930
> >> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1930> ]) and/or only a single
> >>   AS in the AS_SET are by far the most common cases."
> >>
> >>
> >> In your comments on adoption, consider:
> >>
> >> 1)  Should the IDR WG remove AS_SET and AS_CONFED_SET from BGP?
> >> 2)  Is this document a reasonable document to document that removal?
> >> 3)  Are there technical flaws in the arguments for removal?
> >> 4)  Are there issues with the text?
> >>
> >> Cheerily, Susan Hares
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Idr mailing list
> >> Idr@ietf.org
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Idr mailing list
> > Idr@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> Idr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>

-- 
Best regards,
Alexander Azimov

Re: [Idr] WG adoption for draft-kumari-deprecate-as-set-confed-set - 8/16 to 8/30/2019