Re: [Idr] IETF LC for IDR-ish document <draft-ietf-grow-bgp-reject-05.txt> (Default EBGP Route Propagation Behavior Without Policies) to Proposed Standard

Gert Doering <gert@space.net> Fri, 21 April 2017 15:48 UTC

Return-Path: <gert@space.net>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23791129584 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Apr 2017 08:48:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lnFB7DwkYs-H for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Apr 2017 08:48:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mobil.space.net (mobil.space.net [195.30.115.67]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 91F2612954D for <idr@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Apr 2017 08:48:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: idr@ietf.org
Received: from mobil.space.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2A6260BAA for <idr@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Apr 2017 17:48:36 +0200 (CEST)
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
Received: from moebius4.space.net (moebius4.space.net [IPv6:2001:608:2:2::251]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AC7F60ADF; Fri, 21 Apr 2017 17:48:36 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by moebius4.space.net (Postfix, from userid 1007) id 8C48521AD7; Fri, 21 Apr 2017 17:48:36 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2017 17:48:36 +0200
From: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
To: Job Snijders <job@instituut.net>
Cc: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>, "bruno.decraene@orange.com" <bruno.decraene@orange.com>, "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20170421154836.GU25069@Space.Net>
References: <CA+wi2hMPYcwbNhHtuWKWUXb4Lg3x81p786yLqeNEHFV1okGRvg@mail.gmail.com> <dc04fe80-f844-29b1-2676-8f2bbda0ecbe@juniper.net> <28014_1492762849_58F9C0E0_28014_6541_1_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A31CC3773@OPEXCLILM21.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <20170421090145.f5yuhimb4qg7knrf@Vurt.local> <19977_1492775899_58F9F3DB_19977_3102_1_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A31CC3DAC@OPEXCLILM21.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <20170421124011.mdxpyoijvfh7eus4@Vurt.local> <1334_1492785121_58FA17E1_1334_3109_1_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A31CC4307@OPEXCLILM21.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <CA+b+ERn1vX_b20CGyNbck+_Gm0Dt=fqnxqWzdqHmHiPKNTWD_Q@mail.gmail.com> <20170421153741.GT25069@Space.Net> <20170421154624.fxbtupcnthdmls3t@Vurt.local>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="s+S+w46K/2uZ1vVJ"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170421154624.fxbtupcnthdmls3t@Vurt.local>
X-NCC-RegID: de.space
User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.2 (2016-11-26)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/bsBpHoeJJZaZHx_6qGA5SezmDmU>
Subject: Re: [Idr] IETF LC for IDR-ish document <draft-ietf-grow-bgp-reject-05.txt> (Default EBGP Route Propagation Behavior Without Policies) to Proposed Standard
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Fri, 21 Apr 2017 15:48:40 -0000

Hi,

On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 05:46:24PM +0200, Job Snijders wrote:
> So perhaps we can rephrase the rethorical question "Are we really that
> bad in Internet NOCs" into "Are NOCs forced to work with poor user
> interfaces, inconsistency across implementations, and insecure defaults?"
> - Yes, they are. Vendors would do well to take same ownership.

And this, yes.

(... and I applaud the IOS XR folks for boldly going where no Cisco 
OS has gone before, and demonstrating that "yes, it can be done!")

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444           USt-IdNr.: DE813185279