Protocol Action: Exterior Gateway Protocol

bmanning@isi.edu Thu, 08 September 1994 23:01 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa11370; 8 Sep 94 19:01 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa11366; 8 Sep 94 19:01 EDT
Received: from moe.rice.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa17303; 8 Sep 94 19:01 EDT
Received: from venera.isi.edu by moe.rice.edu (AA25822); Thu, 8 Sep 94 17:35:52 CDT
Received: from zed.isi.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-18) id <AA17969>; Thu, 8 Sep 1994 15:35:51 -0700
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: bmanning@isi.edu
Posted-Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 15:35:36 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199409082235.AA09201@zed.isi.edu>
Received: by zed.isi.edu (5.65c/4.0.3-4) id <AA09201>; Thu, 8 Sep 1994 15:35:36 -0700
Subject: Protocol Action: Exterior Gateway Protocol
To: rreq@rice.edu
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 1994 15:35:36 -0700
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1732

Forwarded message:
From ietf-announce-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US Thu Sep  8 15:29:34 1994
To: IETF-Announce: ;
Cc: RFC Editor <rfc-editor@ISI.EDU>
Cc: Internet Architecture Board <iab@ISI.EDU>
Sender: ietf-announce-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: IESG Secretary <iesg-secretary@CNRI.Reston.VA.US>
Subject: Protocol Action: Exterior Gateway Protocol formal specification to
         Historic
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 94 15:42:05 -0400
X-Orig-Sender: jstewart@CNRI.Reston.VA.US
Message-Id:  <9409081542.aa08889@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US>



  The IESG has reclassified "Exterior Gateway Protocol formal
  specification" (RFC 904) to Historic.  The IESG contact person
  is Joel Halpern.
 
 
Technical Summary

  EGP exists in order to convey net-reachability information
  between neighboring gateways, possibly in different autonnomous
  systems. The protocol was designed around a set of architectural
  and topological restrictions (as described in RFC 827 and
  RFC 888).

  These restrictions no longer related well to the actual
  internetwork topology.  Also, the advent of CIDR has changed the
  interpretation of addresses and prefixes.  With the advancement
  of BGP-4 to Proposed Standard, we now have a practical
  alternative to EGP available to the community, and will focus
  future development and support on that.

Working Group Summary

  The BGP and IDRP Working Groups have strongly endorsed this
  change.

Protocol Quality

  While there is still usage of EGP in practical networks, the
  Routing Area Director feels that moving EGP to Historic status
  will encourage the migration of those networks from a protocol
  which can not cope with current topology and infrastructure to
  one which can.



-- 
--bill