Re: [Idr] Last Call: <draft-ietf-idr-ix-bgp-route-server-10.txt> (Internet Exchange BGP Route Server) to Proposed Standard

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2016-06-01 13:17, Nick Hilliard wrote:
Marco Marzetti wrote:
I agree with you that you can run a route server and insert your ASn in
the path, but i think that is a lack of common sense which brings only
contraries and no benefits.

About RFC2119: It says that "SHOULD NOT" implies a valid reason to
accept a behavior, but i can't find any.

I agree that it is not a clever thing to do. The valid reason to accept
the behaviour is that it works in practice: some IXPs have done this in
production, in many cases for years.

There is a secondary reason: some rs client bgp stacks don't support the
option to accept an AS path from the RS where the leftmost entry on the
AS path != peeras.

These are not "good" reasons in the sense that they mandate behaviour
which is suboptimal, but they are valid reasons.

Nick

Nick,

I think that we should define a standard that addresses and corrects those non-clever behaviors rather than embrace them.

My point is: even if they work in the real world, they do because of the workarounds that other people put in place and they bring no benefits.

Regards

--
Marco




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]