Re: [Idr] Review of draft-ietf-large-community-06.txt

[heasley <[e-mail]>]

Sat, Nov 05, 2016 at 06:18:36PM +0100, Robert Raszuk:
> Hi Job,
> 
> > By default, the BGP speaker does not send/transmit community
> > > attributes. Even if the COMMUNITIES path attribute is an optional
> > > transitive attribute. This is the current reality application.
> >
> > *​​Then change your default!*
> >
> 
> ​Are you making a recommendation here ​that BGP implementations should now
> be modified to send BGP communities to EBGP (and obviously IBGP) peers by
> default ?
> 
> Do you mean that only for large communities or also for standards and
> extended communities ?
> 
> I think Shunwan's point is very valid and it seems by making above
> recommendation to modify the BGP implementations default you agree with it.
> If so draft should reflect this as this is no longer market nor EBGP peers
> agreement.

I do not believe Job made either recommendation.  He merely said that
Shunwan as an implementer (I am assuming) could change their implementation's
default.

Job did write that it was adventageous for -large- to have similar properties
as rfc1997.  neither docs make recommendations about the feature to which
Shunwan is referring.