Re: [Idr] Thoughts on

"Susan Hares" <> Thu, 23 March 2017 19:12 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA68A129BEF for <>; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 12:12:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.957
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.957 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DOS_OUTLOOK_TO_MX=2.845, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SevGmDpIKj-O for <>; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 12:12:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4EFAE1296CD for <>; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 12:12:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=loggedin (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=;
From: Susan Hares <>
To: 'Eric C Rosen' <>, "'John G. Scudder'" <>
References: <048701d29cd9$15204b80$3f60e280$> <022201d29ce6$ffb2ba40$ff182ec0$> <> <02dc01d2a25b$a1eca590$e5c5f0b0$> <> <> <> <050901d2a3fd$734b3e10$59e1ba30$> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 15:06:59 -0400
Message-ID: <00a601d2a408$a61f52d0$f25df870$>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00A7_01D2A3E7.1F0E9D30"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQHgLJVhftftdlZ2OeQGM5dxbx7ZtQIfusEjApalZLoB3VIuCQJnQvCHApVdmPIBwb1GPgECN7t0Ahi7s66hBE8oUA==
Content-Language: en-us
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Thoughts on
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 19:12:08 -0000


<wg chair hat off> 

<individual contributor hat on> 

Thank you for the clarification.   Suggest your solution in a draft if you
believe it is complete.  I only care that operators problems are fixed. 

<individual contributor hat off> 


Cheerily, Sue 


From: Idr [] On Behalf Of Eric C Rosen
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2017 2:51 PM
To: Susan Hares; 'John G. Scudder'
Subject: Re: [Idr] Thoughts on


On 3/23/2017 1:46 PM, Susan Hares wrote:


1)      IETF consensus trumps  DE opinion -   If you are suggesting that the
WG chair(s) that sponsored a draft should not be the Designated Expert.  

That was not my suggestion.  

2)      Adequate review -  If you wish it to be a single working group
assigning BGP code points, 

That was not my suggestion either.

3)      On code point squatting, operators had real problems with the
current situation.   Job said "automatic checks on drafts",  Sue said "IETF
Standard + DE of BGP chairs where IETF Consensus wins"

My point is that neither of these solutions will solve the problem.  They
simply create more process and just make the problem worse.

The problem is real, the solutions are bogus.