Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
[..]
Keep in mind one thing: the draft is aimed at developing/standardizing
the mechanism to propagate filtering info, _not_ to regulate nor
recommend the way it should be done in production nor who should do it.
I have not heard anything so far about this being unclear, as I
presented it at the last IETF:
http://arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us/redisfilter.ppt. It seems to me that
you are jumping into the boat late without a complete understanding of
the history behind it.
You put the car before the horse: we don't have such a mechanism yet,
how could you judge it?
One step at a time: first, we need vendors to implement. So far, only
Cisco has shown some interest in it (CSCed45744). Some of us have set
aside a 7500 to monkey with the beta code when it finally arrives
[hint].
Then, all interesting parties (an when I whois AS29467 I see some
legitimacy here) will evaluate how good the extended BGP feed mechanism
is. If you think it stinks, just don't use it.
As of myself, I welcome the efforts of Deepak and Daniel and invite them
to join their efforts to a diverse group that is willing to spend some
time for the common good.
Michel.