IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] draft-decraene-idr-reserved-extended-communities-00

Jie Dong <dongjie_dj@huawei.com> Tue, 16 November 2010 03:26 UTC

Return-Path: <dongjie_dj@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: idr@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D593C3A6D87 for <idr@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 19:26:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.195
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.195 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oQWhRgCaXugM for <idr@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 19:26:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from szxga05-in.huawei.com (unknown [119.145.14.67]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F5093A6D86 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 19:26:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from huawei.com (szxga05-in [172.24.2.49]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LBY00EGNK9GPP@szxga05-in.huawei.com> for idr@ietf.org; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 11:27:17 +0800 (CST)
Received: from huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LBY00GH5K9FSK@szxga05-in.huawei.com> for idr@ietf.org; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 11:27:16 +0800 (CST)
Received: from d65110 ([10.110.98.79]) by szxml04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0LBY00920K9FMB@szxml04-in.huawei.com> for idr@ietf.org; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 11:27:15 +0800 (CST)
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 11:27:14 +0800
From: Jie Dong <dongjie_dj@huawei.com>
In-reply-to: <11856.1289849855@erosen-linux>
To: erosen@cisco.com, bruno.decraene@orange-ftgroup.com
Message-id: <001701cb853e$2a015cb0$7e041610$@com>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-language: zh-cn
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Thread-index: AcuE/JlfiCJfqwT3TtiBQGYeFJ6iyAAPAJnw
References: "15 Nov 2010 19:05:26 +0100." <FE8F6A65A433A744964C65B6EDFDC24001A99167@ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr> <11856.1289849855@erosen-linux>
Cc: idr@ietf.org, draft-decraene-idr-reserved-extended-communities@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Idr] draft-decraene-idr-reserved-extended-communities-00
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 03:26:56 -0000

Hi Eric,

> > A registry for reserved/well known/std action community do exist. Do you
> > have a concern with it?
> 
> Yes, I don't think it makes any sense to have a registry for communities
> that "have global significance and their operations shall be implemented
in
> any community-attribute-aware BGP speaker"; obviously one can't allocate a
> new codepoint from that registry without throwing all existing
> implementations out of compliance.

As extended communities is an optional transitive attribute, and some of
which may have a limited propagation scope (non-transitive across AS ), a
new codepoint may not have such great impact on the network.


Best regards,
Jie

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email