Re: [Idr] Draft IDR charter text

Job Snijders <> Thu, 25 July 2019 22:58 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67DD912023B for <>; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:58:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PBb1soTi_SMa for <>; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:58:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::336]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 984D91201BB for <>; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:58:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id x21so14951749otq.12 for <>; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:58:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=FbB9chcbYavmk67HX+HUOMxkYE0oDlZdcP4WpHPmd6w=; b=IimWjrHcbuE07NNAoN9eLPiZcoOdEYimMpC9a2OKyIkPbntLS/gGDE0l47nNePpK4D LZ8lUCIAGc+KqL0L/JO/aZUWm23jUByZ84xX98TQRDX9ZVEaZkgJwkn1N+MYZNrknuTq gcWx5C3k3BJ0MsuDrxjMB8u5oKto8bbfg//laSpnhgs5I8M7N5idlGgo9X8M1HFnR7Fb KIUFJtv6KDMiup9X5AaYXb6qEzUaGsyvaXtdTYodkklDQVKwXQRkzMeMDfzdsInHOUAp BCbcquJi/pYF28aFM1s7z5TW/7q26kn5YRTceEKOyFuJRg/IEclUMDOpwXCL32eJCYbO CC4A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=FbB9chcbYavmk67HX+HUOMxkYE0oDlZdcP4WpHPmd6w=; b=oKcmDtCaQby13r7D53GN1uCzameIuKtS0QlOJ3fOGQFERoDC5ZN8kZKZnd98hGn2UX r32mQWAXxF4/4SNMfhCPnrtL682GTWs2TQv7+h1lAvQoSSw5eF3b0qMA43EiqAOHHg7H yRrS0F0fTJlUNJTV0nz+jMKOV2ydwGDVLVFS70+/fbWwFpBM39A5uNAn6qdDnsPIHGHk Ed792WErJE5U518c32lXnFvU0Gfb4hkeVCYiVBXc0iGWodBpE9fQTSKFVEfQ/FYa5OUl a9jyl1NprYayWzT7yFN3rgZ0b6JVjI0eFBjCo4sOPJrib7yVDj1IDm3GXSAvaLy9ji1+ 9H+g==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVU0Jd5ZKhsQh+oRryKpvusA9IpVeQN/Cc8AX5culemF/+x1Tr4 Hzz1PMoR0aJszbsnCLB1NNSIoKwl/bKwx3zLUrRf1h+v
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyr9SMW3fI7s0fYN+Y9VPasJBh2rG5uT9hu5iY5dWhsYdoKFze4j8S2DiVcdQd6ixew02Ukm5YCaRhsWAyXk1A=
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:7d90:: with SMTP id j16mr62240416otn.95.1564095520705; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:58:40 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Job Snijders <>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 18:58:28 -0400
Message-ID: <>
To: John Scudder <>
Cc: idr wg <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e821e6058e895d5f"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Draft IDR charter text
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 22:58:45 -0000

This looks great so far

On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 18:44 John Scudder <>

> Hi All,
> Here’s a draft of new charter text we came up with after consulting with
> the Routing ADs [*]:
> —
> The Inter-Domain Routing Working Group is chartered to standardize,
> develop, and support the Border Gateway Protocol Version 4 (BGP-4)  [RFC
> 4271] capable of supporting policy based routing for TCP/IP Internets.
> The main objective of the working group is to support the use of BGP-4 by
> IP version 4 and IP version 6 networks. The working group will continue to
> work on improving the robustness, scalability, deployability,
> manageability, and security of BGP.
> BGP is an enabling protocol or subject of interest for a number of other
> working groups, including BESS, LSVR, LSR, SIDROPS, and GROW. Those (and
> other) groups may develop standards that make use of BGP. IDR asks that
> when another working group proposes changes and additions to BGP, that IDR
> should be informed. In particular, if another working group requests
> allocation of a code point from a BGP protocol registry, IDR should be
> consulted as soon as possible. The Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Parameters
> group is the most notable example of such registries. In general, protocol
> changes should be progressed through IDR, whereas uses of extensible
> mechanisms need only notification to IDR.
> IDR desires to review extensions made to BGP in other working groups at
> least at WG document adoption and during working group last calls. The IDR
> working group will also provide advice and guidance on BGP to other working
> groups as requested.
> IDR welcomes advice and requirements from other working groups,
> particularly from GROW which is chartered for this purpose.
> —
> The main changes vs. the prior text are,
> 1. Talks in more detail about what we expect from our peer WGs and what
> they can expect from us.
> 2. Removes the “work items” section. This was largely redundant with the
> milestones and it just muddies the waters.
> Essentially the intent is to say “we do BGP” but a little more rigorously
> (or at least verbosely). :-)
> If we adopt this charter, or one like it, the next step would be to do a
> pass of updating our milestones, fairly extensively. Many of the
> suggestions that have been made so far (thank you!) would fall into that
> discussion.
> Regards,
> —John
> [*] Does not imply the Routing ADs have approved this text, they have not
> provided an opinion on it.
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list