Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-as-migration-04.txt

"George, Wes" <> Thu, 09 April 2015 14:13 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5141E1A1B8D for <>; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 07:13:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.475
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.475 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HysOCVir6tG5 for <>; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 07:13:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B38A1A1DE2 for <>; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 07:13:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.11,550,1422939600"; d="scan'208";a="851801723"
Received: from unknown (HELO ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-MD5; 09 Apr 2015 09:58:51 -0400
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 10:13:14 -0400
From: "George, Wes" <>
To: "" <>, "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" <>, Alia Atlas <>, Susan Hares <>
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 10:13:18 -0400
Thread-Topic: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-as-migration-04.txt
Thread-Index: AdByz1Gv6sWygJdjT76TInh4qVQRLA==
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-as-migration-04.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2015 14:13:21 -0000

Shane and I believe that this revision addresses the majority of concerns
raised during IESG evaluation, including Alvaro's review.

I don't know if this has to go back through WGLC or if it can just be put
back on IESG schedule, as a good bit of the text was changed to address
the concerns about this being too vendor-specific, including some of the
normative language, so I'll leave that to the chairs and ADs to decide.



On 4/9/15, 10:02 AM, "" <>

>A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> This draft is a work item of the Inter-Domain Routing Working Group of
>the IETF.
>        Title           : Autonomous System Migration Mechanisms and
>Their Effects on the BGP AS_PATH Attribute
>        Authors         : Wesley George
>                          Shane Amante
>       Filename        : draft-ietf-idr-as-migration-04.txt
>       Pages           : 16
>       Date            : 2015-04-09
>   This draft discusses some commonly-used BGP mechanisms for ASN
>   migration that are not formally part of the BGP4 protocol
>   specification and may be vendor-specific in exact implementation.  It
>   is necessary to document these de facto standards to ensure that they
>   are properly supported in future BGP protocol work.
>The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>There's also a htmlized version available at:
>A diff from the previous version is available at:
>Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
>until the htmlized version and diff are available at
>Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>Idr mailing list

This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.