Re: [Idr] draft-chen-bgp-prefix-orf-07.txt as an IDR WG document

On Thu, Jul 22, 2004 at 07:32:58PM -0700, Chandrashekhar Appanna wrote:
> Yes, I think this should become a WG doc.

I also think it should become a WG document (but still need to do
a quick read-through of the current draft).

> On the topic of merging the various ORF type docs, if there
> was a clear consensus or need, I am sure the original authors
> would have added them all in the base spec.

To nitpick a little bit, ORFs, like extended communities, seem to 
strongly have come out of certain vendor's needs for certain
technology to solve a specific problem.  The fact that they were
adaptable to a more generic tool speaks well of the authors of
the specifications.  However, I think that a more generic solution
would have done us well in each case.  

ORFs are extremely coarse policy.  Extended communities have already
been criticized for not being flexibile enough.  Yet each solves
the problems for their original problem space well enough.  Rough
consensus and all that. :-)

> Since they did not
> and we are seeing the individual submissions, I would leave it
> that way so that only the ones required will survive....

I'd generally agree. 

-- 
Jeff Haas 
NextHop Technologies

_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
Idr@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr