2011/6/27 Shishio Tsuchiya <[email protected]>:
> Chairs and All
> We have published latest version.
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-shishio-grow-isp-rfd-implement-survey-02
> We could get 63 response from global operator groups.
> If you have any comments,I really appreciate it.
>

Hello Grow Folks, could we have some discussion about where this doc
sits? It seems, to me, that we're pretty close to
no-substantive-comments from the WG, so WGLC should be imminent...

-Chris

> (2011/04/01 16:55), Christopher Morrow wrote:
>> Given the discussion in IDR yesterday and in GROW today, it seems that
>> the room temperature pushed to adoption the survey work and potential
>> default's change discussion to GROW. Could we get some discussion
>> on-list about this, draft:
>> draft-shishio-grow-isp-rfd-implement-survey-01
>>
>> <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-shishio-grow-isp-rfd-implement-survey-01>
>>
>> "BGP Route Flap Damping [RFC2439] is a mechanism that targets route
>>     stability.  It penalyzes routes that flap with the aim of reducing
>>     CPU load on the routers.
>>
>>     But it has side-effects.  Thus, in 2006, RIPE recommended not to use
>>     Route Flap Damping (see RIPE-378).
>>
>>     Now, some researchers propose to turn RFD, with less aggressive
>>     parameters, back on [draft-ymbk-rfd-usable].
>>
>>     This document describes results of a survey conducted amoung service
>>     provider on their use of BGP Route Flap Damping."
>>
>> Again, with the goal to pick up the draft as a WG Item, and end up
>> feeding Route Flap Dampening defaults back into vendor
>> implementations.
>>
>> Thanks!
>> -Chris
>> grow-co-chair
>> _______________________________________________
>> GROW mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
>>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow

Reply via email to