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

Zhuangshunwan <> Mon, 07 November 2016 15:31 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A31D3129A62 for <>; Mon, 7 Nov 2016 07:31:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.717
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.717 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id M2I4SvyAp1sy for <>; Mon, 7 Nov 2016 07:31:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8AEA71299C9 for <>; Mon, 7 Nov 2016 07:31:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from (EHLO ([]) by (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CZW31436; Mon, 07 Nov 2016 15:31:33 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id; Mon, 7 Nov 2016 15:31:32 +0000
Received: from ([fe80::a54a:89d2:c471:ff]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Mon, 7 Nov 2016 23:31:27 +0800
From: Zhuangshunwan <>
To: "Jakob Heitz (jheitz)" <>
Thread-Topic: [Idr] Review of draft-ietf-large-community-06.txt
Thread-Index: AQHSN1BcX5oGwTVUrUSuyFaP3/PvrqDK+MqAgAKstyA=
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 15:31:26 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <20161104195346.GK961@Vurt.local> <20161104201631.GA35942@Vurt.lan> <> <20161104221030.GD37681@Vurt.lan> <> <20161104230536.GJ37681@Vurt.lan> <> <20161105103526.GM952@Vurt.local> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_19AB2A007F56DB4E8257F949A2FB9858C87B1DCENKGEML515MBXchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A090204.58209E56.00E3, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: d8daaf6d9f8b6e413243f5c8ab079b5c
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Review of draft-ietf-large-community-06.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2016 15:31:41 -0000

发件人: Jakob Heitz (jheitz) []
发送时间: 2016年11月6日 14:27
收件人: Zhuangshunwan
抄送:; Job Snijders
主题: Re: [Idr] Review of draft-ietf-large-community-06.txt


On Nov 5, 2016, at 3:35 AM, Job Snijders <<>> wrote:

On Sat, Nov 05, 2016 at 10:28:58AM +0000, Zhuangshunwan wrote:

Some customers from IDC/OTT complain that ISPs can not transmit their
community attributes, because ISPs do not transmit community
attributes in most cases.

I find it hard to make or accept quantative statements in this context,
I know some ISP that scrub all communities, and I know some ISPs that
pass on as much communities as possible. The market will decide.

Another reason is that some ISPs use private ASNs rather than their own ASN in the first 16 bits of the community, because there is not enough leftover bits to express the action. That makes it impossible for an ISP to transmit them to another ISP, because of name space clashes. That should no longer be a problem with large communities.
[Shunwan] Thank you for your explanation!

See<>/ for examples of communities. BTW, I don't recognize any Chinese ISPs on that site. Can you share some community specifications for any Chinese ISPs, please?
[Shunwan] Sorry, I looked through the entire list, but no Chinese ISPs were found on this list as far as I know.

[Shunwan] Your Chinese is very good!