IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] WGLC for draft-ietf-idr-mrai-dep-03

<bruno.decraene@orange-ftgroup.com> Tue, 29 March 2011 10:04 UTC

Return-Path: <bruno.decraene@orange-ftgroup.com>
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 BE2EF3A68EC for <idr@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 03:04:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.949
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.949 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, J_CHICKENPOX_43=0.6]
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 HG4HNzWkpCGv for <idr@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 03:04:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from r-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (r-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com [217.108.152.41]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D1033A6836 for <idr@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 03:04:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from r-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id AEB246D8001; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 12:06:40 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ftrdsmtp2.rd.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.192.128.47]) by r-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4CBE6C0001; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 12:06:40 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.192.128.56]) by ftrdsmtp2.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 29 Mar 2011 12:06:07 +0200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 12:06:05 +0200
Message-ID: <FE8F6A65A433A744964C65B6EDFDC240020E57C5@ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr>
In-Reply-To: <5C153416-1444-48AA-A940-7AFB4ADEEB2A@juniper.net>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Idr] WGLC for draft-ietf-idr-mrai-dep-03
Thread-Index: Acvt7WBiwd2yvMSiTy6OuQiqKQjbRwACZMYQ
References: <5C153416-1444-48AA-A940-7AFB4ADEEB2A@juniper.net>
From: bruno.decraene@orange-ftgroup.com
To: jgs@juniper.net, idr@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Mar 2011 10:06:07.0041 (UTC) FILETIME=[EB971310:01CBEDF8]
Subject: Re: [Idr] WGLC for draft-ietf-idr-mrai-dep-03
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/mail-archive/web/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>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 10:04:30 -0000

Hi all,

Ok for deprecating the MRAI default value.
 
Sorry if I'm missing something obvious or already discussed but is there
a need to recommend that an AS (SP/ISP) use (hence configure) the same
MRAI value for all its IBGP sessions?
Also, RFC 4271 made a distinction between iBGP and eBGP sessions
(basically MRAI value on iBGP should be lower than on eBGP). Does this
need to be added or is this also deprecated?

Thanks,
Regards,
Bruno

> -----Original Message-----
> From: idr-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:idr-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
John Scudder
> Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2011 10:45 AM
> To: idr@ietf.org List
> Subject: [Idr] WGLC for draft-ietf-idr-mrai-dep-03
> 
> Folks,
> 
> We have been remiss in not WGLC'ing this draft earlier, it has been
stable for some time and is
> exceptionally short (about a half-page plus boilerplate):
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-mrai-dep-03.txt
> 
> Please send any comments on the draft to the list by April 12, 2011.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> --John
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> Idr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email