Re: [Idr] WG Adoption call for draft-wang-idr-rd-orf-05.txt (2/4/2021 to 2/18/2021)

[Aijun Wang <[e-mail]>]

Hi, Robert:

Don’t you think Jim’s last comments is contradicted?
After replying this mail to you, I will focus on the discussion on Jeff’s thread. 

Aijun Wang
China Telecom

> On Feb 16, 2021, at 05:31, Robert Raszuk <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Jim, 
> 
> And quite frankly I think you nailed it. 
> 
> If one is to provide a service he better purchase the right gear for it. 
> 
> Not some weak PEs which balance on the cliff of falling under light wind ... 

[WAJ] There are lots of devices within the network, in different locations, from different vendors, bought/upgrade in different time. It is natural that they have different capabilities of wind resistance.

> 
> - - - 
> 
> Mitigations which are deployed in many networks have been suggested. Protect from issue not allow it to happen then try to patch it. 
> 
> Alternative deployment models have been proposed too. 
> 
> Sorry I do not buy the reason stated that mistaken redistribution of the Internet to the VPN will crash the network. Right gear carries Internet in a VRF just fine. And if it crashes ... so be it. Next time folks touching PEs will be more careful. 

[WAJ] The network should have the capability to prevent such thing happen. Is there any operator want to wait for it, do nothing and just give/educate the folks lessons in final?

> 
> I also do not accept as a reason Inter-AS option B or C. If you do not trust your AS peer do A+B or A. 

[WAJ] Trust is one side, protecting oneself is another side. 

> 
> For me this topic is considered closed. 
> 
> Thx,
> Robert.
> 
> 
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 10:15 PM UTTARO, JAMES <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> Here is another fact..
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> It is more like 10+ Million without an issue.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>>               Jim Uttaro
>>