Re: [Idr] community of the day - common header

[Paul Jakma <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, 8 Sep 2016, Jeffrey Haas wrote:

> attributes for each new type.  I strongly believe that a new common header
> for future community mechanisms is needed:

> - and good will has been burned by that theater.  But regardless of the
> proposal to implement 4:4, 4:4:4, N:4 ipv6:4 or whatever

I think a common header would be good too.

Going with a fixed size 4:4 new community has its attractions from a 
protocol POV, and implenting the wire side.

However, on more user/automation bits of the implementation side, 
preserving type information as much as possible (certainly for the 
obvious stuff) would help with UI/APIs around setting and displaying 
communities. Also, it'd be good to minimise pain for the next time we 
find out we specced too few bits, and an explicit structure approach at 
least would allow (e.g.) a value field to be extended without affecting 
the parsing of things like, say, an ASN-typed originator field.

regards,
-- 
Paul Jakma | [e-mail] | @pjakma | Key ID: 0xD86BF79464A2FF6A
Fortune:
Snow Day -- stay home.