Hi Warren, This is clearly not unanimous/ not everyone is happy, but (in my view) > there is *rough* consensus for this to progress. >
The group of users of BGP which this update impacts the most are members of BESS WG (cc-ed) and not IDR WG due to the fact that this proposal applies to all AFI/SAFIs. IMO before you progress anywhere with this IETF LC BESS WG should express their formal opinion on it. Example of in or out eBGP policy where you are sending MAC addresses in EVPN AF needs to be provided and explained why it makes sense. Likewise examples of RTC AF for L3VPN Inter-as needs to be discussed. Otherwise the group of people which defined a lot of non ISP uses of BGP may be suddenly surprised down the read for keeping them out of the loop and have customers loosing reachability upon compliant non sequential router OS upgrade. Cheers, Robert. REF: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-grow-bgp-reject-06
_______________________________________________ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
