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