North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: 4-Byte AS Number soon to come?
In message <[email protected]>, Iljitsch van Beijn um writes: > >On 23-aug-2005, at 15:16, Paul Jakma wrote: > >>> then i would prefer going ahead with the new solution and picking >>> it up if it works! > >> Well, in order to justify the hassle of invalidating existing >> implementations of the draft as it stands, I suspect there'd need >> to be sufficient examples of real-world problems with passive BGP >> 'readers' to get consensus in IDR to change. > >This is exactly why people shouldn't implement drafts except possibly >as a private in-house feasibility study. In general, you're right; however, BGP documents have a special status. Because of how crucial BGP is to the Internet's functioning, I-Ds won't progress to RFC status (at least as Proposed Standard) without two interoperating implementations. For everything else, you're right. --Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
|