Re: [GROW] Last Call: <draft-ietf-grow-blackholing-00.txt> (BLACKHOLE BGP Community for Blackholing) to Proposed Standard

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

 



Hi David,

Thank you for your feedback.

On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 04:23:23PM -0500, David Farmer wrote:
> > Range   Registration Procedures
> > 0xFFFF0000-0xFFFF8000   First Come First Served
> > 0xFFFF8001-0xFFFFFFFF   Standards Action
> 
> And given that the code point that is being defined is 0xFFFF029A and
> that falls in the First Come First Served range, technically standards
> action isn't required.  Furthermore, this draft is really dependant on
> RFC3882 and RFC5635, both Informational Status, for a full description
> of the intended functionality.   If this draft is Standards Track,
> some may mistakenly think there is some kind of preference for this
> mechanism for triggering Blackholes, vs. the other mechanisms
> discussed in RFC3882 and RFC5635.  I fully support this defining this
> Well-Known BGP Community, however I believe it should be of equal
> stature as the other mechanisms discussed in
> RFC3882 and RFC5635.
> 
> Therefore, for the above reasons, I think the more appropriate status
> for this draft is Informational.

In light of what you described here, I don't mind changing the intended
status from STD to INFO. Also, I see similarities with NOPEER/RFC3765
which is "Informational" too.

Would anyone object to this change?

Kind regards,

Job




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