IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: bgp4-17 Section 9

Alex Zinin <azinin@nexsi.com> Fri, 18 January 2002 21:04 UTC

Received: from trapdoor.merit.edu (postfix@trapdoor.merit.edu [198.108.1.26]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA06635 for <idr-archive@nic.merit.edu>; Fri, 18 Jan 2002 16:04:21 -0500 (EST)
Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) id ECA0B91321; Fri, 18 Jan 2002 16:03:29 -0500 (EST)
Delivered-To: idr-outgoing@trapdoor.merit.edu
Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id A345F91324; Fri, 18 Jan 2002 16:03:19 -0500 (EST)
Delivered-To: idr@trapdoor.merit.edu
Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FE9391321 for <idr@trapdoor.merit.edu>; Fri, 18 Jan 2002 16:02:46 -0500 (EST)
Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 50B275DD98; Fri, 18 Jan 2002 16:02:46 -0500 (EST)
Delivered-To: idr@merit.edu
Received: from mail.nexsi.com (unknown [66.35.212.41]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAB295DD92 for <idr@merit.edu>; Fri, 18 Jan 2002 16:02:45 -0500 (EST)
Received: from khonsu.sw.nexsi.com (dynam34.sw.nexsi.com [172.17.212.34]) by mail.nexsi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA30372; Fri, 18 Jan 2002 13:01:50 -0800
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 13:01:48 -0800
From: Alex Zinin <azinin@nexsi.com>
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.51) Personal
Reply-To: Alex Zinin <azinin@nexsi.com>
Organization: Nexsi Systems
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <117364655587.20020118130148@nexsi.com>
To: Tom Petch <nwnetworks@dial.pipex.com>
Cc: Yakov Rekhter <yakov@juniper.net>, idr@merit.edu
Subject: Re: bgp4-17 Section 9
In-Reply-To: <00c901c2bf33$2fbdcb40$0301a8c0@tom3>
References: <00c901c2bf33$2fbdcb40$0301a8c0@tom3>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-idr@merit.edu
Precedence: bulk

Tom,

 Though definitely a sane idea, I'm afraid this
 will not match the existing implementations.

-- 
Alex Zinin

P.S. Fix the text wrapping thing, pls :)


Saturday, January 18, 2003, 12:42:45 PM, Tom Petch wrote:

> For ensuring that advertised routes are present in the
> Routing Table,
> and not just in the Loc-RIB, how about

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email