Re: [Idr] Requesting WG adoption for draft-scudder-idr-capabilities-registry-change-02.txt

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <> Thu, 20 September 2018 09:37 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62E89130E50; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 02:37:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IJqhyVFMgDCM; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 02:37:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4141E130DE4; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 02:37:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=2566; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1537436227; x=1538645827; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:content-id: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=JWAa/mM272ZjNQqdbfLV7FPnYLvXyx+kK9vyx0Xpy7w=; b=ZZ064FZFhbYtJzVbdVYepfAkAB3HxycmQZ4ggbLnaymau7ue4U9Uzsuv 9mXO8RFBfnREpyhyk5jt1fbhyl1JBw7lYJ35JU9YD+Jj2yJKDJHwMPL+2 msqqYbHDalBIIR9LwC2bJOK8fj2gfVMq/xsvAzJO9sLFc5CgfJ4gtV3mS k=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0BUAABJaaNb/5JdJa1cGQEBAQEBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEBAQcBAQEBAYFQgghlfygKg2mIFYwyhUqTEYF6CxgNhEcZgykhNBgBAwE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAgEBAm0cDIU5AgEDAQEhEToLEgEIDgwCJgIEJQsVEgQBDQWDIQGCAQ+jYYE?= =?us-ascii?q?uhHeFIwWBC4lkF4IAgRInH4JMgUEBgVkBAYEtNIMBMYImAoYfgh2GcY1BCQK?= =?us-ascii?q?MVINOF4FEhFCJDpROAhEUgSUdOIFVcBU7KgGCQYIxHIhJhT5vAYxOgR4BAQ?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.53,397,1531785600"; d="scan'208";a="174192075"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 20 Sep 2018 09:37:06 +0000
Received: from ( []) by (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id w8K9b6Xm002375 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 20 Sep 2018 09:37:06 GMT
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 05:37:05 -0400
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.00.1395.000; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 05:37:05 -0400
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <>
To: John Scudder <>, "" <>
CC: "" <>
Thread-Topic: [Idr] Requesting WG adoption for draft-scudder-idr-capabilities-registry-change-02.txt
Thread-Index: AQHUUMV+sqEn2M98Pke/8kwMHYP+cw==
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2018 09:37:05 +0000
Message-ID: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Requesting WG adoption for draft-scudder-idr-capabilities-registry-change-02.txt
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, 20 Sep 2018 09:37:09 -0000

Hi John, 

I support WG adoption. 


On 9/20/18, 2:11 AM, "Idr on behalf of John Scudder" < on behalf of> wrote:

    Hi All,
    People with sharp memories may recall that in 2015 I proposed we revise the BGP Capabilities registry to provide a good-sized FCFS space. I think our experience shows this works fine in practice and makes it easier for implementors to get code points in a timely fashion, helping prevent conflicts. I wrote a draft at that time but failed to follow it up. I've revised the draft and would like to propose it as a WG item. Here's the abstract:
       This document updates RFC 5492 by making a change to the registration
       procedures for BGP Capability Codes.  Specifically, the range
       formerly designated "Reserved for Private Use" is divided into three
       new ranges, respectively designated as "First Come First Served",
       "Experimental" and "Reserved".
    One thing to draw your attention to in the revised draft:
       Finally, we invite implementors who have used values in the range
       128-255 to contribute to this draft, so that the values can be
       included in the registry.
    That is, if you have a shipped implementation that's using one of the Private Use values, please contribute that information to the draft and (assuming the draft progresses) you'll automatically get a registered code point.
    --John (an individual contributor to the WG, and recusing myself as co-chair from the adoption and subsequent process)
    Idr mailing list