Re: [Idr] WG LC on draft-ietf-idr-large-community-03.txt (10/17/2016 to 10/31/2016)

[Job Snijders <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 07:08:51PM +0000, heasley wrote:
> Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 05:51:34PM -0400, Jeffrey Haas:
> > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 04:27:31PM -0400, Susan Hares wrote:
> > > This begins a 2 week WG LC on draft-ietf-idr-large-community-03.txt.  (10/17
> > > to 10/31).   Please comment if draft-ietf-idr-large-community-03.txt  is
> > > ready for publication.   
> > 
> > As of version -03, I think the document is clear and largely ready to ship.
> > 
> > My one remaining concern is the reserved communities in section 5.  Given
> > the remaining text in the document saying "you MUST let people put whatever
> > they want in here", the reservation seems superfluous.
> > 
> > I'd suggest outright removing the reservations.  Failing that, they need to
> > be better justified.
> 
> Part of the idea behind reserving 65535:*:* was to reserve a space that
> could later be used for well-knowns, if that was desired - but to not
> spend time now arguing about details of what well-knowns are necessary.
> 
> 0:*:* and 4294967295:*:* mimics rfc1997 and the reserved ASNs.

Jeff argues that a justification should be added. Maybe someone can
pitch in one or two sentences that explain why these are reserved?

Kind regards,

Job