Re: [Idr] RFC-compliant use of Extended Length for new BGPattributes
"Samita Chakrabarti" <samitac@ipinfusion.com> Thu, 13 March 2008 19:09 UTC
Return-Path: <idr-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-idr-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-idr-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2771C3A6ED7; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:09:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.452
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.452 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.015, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sBJK0D-ukW6E; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:09:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6797D3A6CDE; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:09:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: idr@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93BF43A6A5A for <idr@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:09:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9ZodUhwJ1bzX for <idr@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:09:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gateway.ipinfusion.com (unknown [65.223.109.2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 233863A6ED5 for <idr@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:09:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from samitacD600 ([10.10.0.239]) by gateway.ipinfusion.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id m2DJ6fc11658; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:06:41 -0700
From: Samita Chakrabarti <samitac@ipinfusion.com>
To: 'Jeffrey Haas' <jhaas@pfrc.org>, 'Vishwas Manral' <vishwas.ietf@gmail.com>
References: <20080313154849.GL18190@equinix.com><77ead0ec0803131008i6915cf91g8801970eb444a63e@mail.gmail.com><20080313173705.GN18190@equinix.com><20080313175645.GA23909@scc.mi.org><77ead0ec0803131111uea50018sb209bcd5f9f1e10c@mail.gmail.com> <20080313184749.GA5378@scc.mi.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:06:56 -0700
Message-ID: <004201c8853d$6b5067f0$1d118182@samitacD600>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
In-Reply-To: <20080313184749.GA5378@scc.mi.org>
Thread-Index: AciFOsUDBZ4JPTgmQ2qOwKvNtqZ9FQAAjTVw
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198
Cc: idr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Idr] RFC-compliant use of Extended Length for new BGPattributes
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/idr>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: idr-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: idr-bounces@ietf.org
>> I agree to all you say. However I would say all implementations >> following RFC1771 strictly would break. > >Implementations that strictly followed RFC 1771 wouldn't have >interoperated well with much of the Internet. Consider the fact that >AS_PATH length is not one of the inputs to route selection. > >Also keep in mind that RFC 2119 wouldn't be published for almost 2 more >years after 1771. > >It's probably best to keep in mind that 1771 was known to have bugs - >enough bugs for 26 consequent drafts to fix them. There are still bugs >in 4271 although their magnitude is probably significantly less on an >interoperability basis. Conformance to the spec to the exclusion of >interoperating with other vendors may earn you friends with the test >tool manufacturers but it certainly won't make your customers happy. [SC>] Agree. Is there any interop event or any consortium that arranges for RFC4271 or other BGP related interop event ? Thanks, -Samita _______________________________________________ Idr mailing list Idr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
- [Idr] RFC-compliant use of Extended Length for ne… Marcelo Schmidt
- Re: [Idr] RFC-compliant use of Extended Length fo… Vishwas Manral
- Re: [Idr] RFC-compliant use of Extended Length fo… Marcelo Schmidt
- Re: [Idr] RFC-compliant use of Extended Length fo… Vishwas Manral
- Re: [Idr] RFC-compliant use of Extended Length fo… Jeffrey Haas
- Re: [Idr] RFC-compliant use of Extended Length fo… Vishwas Manral
- Re: [Idr] RFC-compliant use of Extended Length fo… Vishwas Manral
- Re: [Idr] RFC-compliant use of Extended Length fo… Jeffrey Haas
- Re: [Idr] RFC-compliant use of Extended Length fo… Samita Chakrabarti
- Re: [Idr] RFC-compliant use of Extended Length fo… Paul Jakma