IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] WGLC on draft-ietf-idr-as-private-reservation-00

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Mon, 10 December 2012 23:37 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.com>
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 55E0321F86CB for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 15:37:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.558
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.558 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.041, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KbyVUoKP7Q1d for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 15:37:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::36]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCA1521F8758 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 15:37:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1TiCv2-000Ae1-SI; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 23:37:53 +0000
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 08:37:51 +0900
Message-ID: <m2d2yh32cw.wl%randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Jon Mitchell <jrmitche@puck.nether.net>
In-Reply-To: <20121210225858.GC24937@puck.nether.net>
References: <CA+b+ERnuWZ+r2O-eFhe3hU00uoU4UKnRcbhLNVXU7p5+DjoWbQ@mail.gmail.com> <C6C16AE3B7961044B04A1BCEC6E2F93603D12A0C@xmb-rcd-x14.cisco.com> <20121210225858.GC24937@puck.nether.net>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Cc: idr wg <idr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Idr] WGLC on draft-ietf-idr-as-private-reservation-00
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <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: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 23:37:54 -0000

this misses my point entirely.  we know not to announce private ASs.

my point was

  o i do not accept the use example in the draft as justification
    for an allocation of more private ASs.  in fact, i object to
    it and specifically object to the draft being advanced.  we do
    this already without your requested allocation which then can
    only be viewed as an end-run around the IR system.

  o i can see tli's point about use in large datacenter deployments.
    if the draft is changed to use that (or a similar real need) as
    the motivation, i would reconsider my objection.

apologies, but i do not know how to be more clear.

randy

v2.31.3 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status