Application Statement

yakov@watson.ibm.com Thu, 09 March 1995 14:10 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa02322; 9 Mar 95 9:10 EST
Received: from acton.timeplex.com by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa02315; 9 Mar 95 9:09 EST
Received: from watson.ibm.com (watson.ibm.com [129.34.139.4]) by maelstrom.acton.timeplex.com (8.6.9/ACTON-MAIN-1.2) with SMTP id JAA16566 for <rolc@acton.timeplex.com>; Thu, 9 Mar 1995 09:03:47 -0500
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: yakov@watson.ibm.com
Message-Id: <199503091403.JAA16566@maelstrom.acton.timeplex.com>
Received: from YKTVMV by watson.ibm.com (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with BSMTP id 1173; Thu, 09 Mar 95 09:04:00 EST
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 95 09:04:00 EST
To: bcole@cisco.com
cc: rolc@acton.timeplex.com
Subject: Application Statement

Ref:  Your note of Wed, 08 Mar 1995 12:25:56 -0800


Bruce,

>Already a more complicated config than for most of our other IP
>routing protocols, since the neighbors are statically configured.

Note that BGP protocol DOES NOT require its neighbor to be *statically*
configured -- in fact in the proposal from Curtis and myself
(draft-rekhter-idr-over-atm-00.txt) a BGP speaker may discover
its neighbor address dynamically (see Section 5 of the I-D).

>I believe one of the goals is to minimize the amount of static
>configuration used in the large cloud.

And I maintain that BGP meets this goal.

Yakov.