Merit Network
Can't find what you're looking for? Search the Mail Archives.
  About Merit   Services   Network   Resources & Support   Network Research   News   Events   Home

Discussion Communities: Merit Network Email List Archives

North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: 4-Byte AS Number soon to come?

  • From: Steven M. Bellovin
  • Date: Tue Aug 23 20:36:01 2005

In message <4EB85F14-0F65-45F6-8DF4-F11A8EE638FD@muada.com>, Iljitsch van Beijn
um writes:
>On 23-aug-2005, at 23:55, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
>
>>> 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.
>
>Ah, that makes sense. So how does that work for work on TCP (which is  
>even more crucial than BGP)? You have to have interoperable  
>implementations before writing the draft?

No.  TCP is end-to-end; a problem shows up on that connection.  By 
contrast, a BGP issue can affect everyone else, since your peers see 
only what you advertise based on your policy and what you've learned 
from others.  Put another way, your problems (or your implementation's 
problems) affect others.  That's not true for TCP, with the exception 
of congestion control behavior.
>
>(I knew the IETF had some trouble with its internal organization. I  
>had no idea it was this bad.)
>
Some would say that it's a feature -- rely on running code.

		--Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb






Discussion Communities


About Merit | Services | Network | Resources & Support | Network Research
News | Events | Contact | Site Map | Merit Network Home


Merit Network, Inc.