On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 11:50:57AM +0000, Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) wrote: > >> Additionally, should there be an alert generated for the network > >> operator. The discard of routes happening quietly (while operator > >> knows nothing about it) is not good. > > >An alert is overkill imho, can't have a system spew 600,000 alerts > >because it rejected a full table feed. > > I was thinking one single configuration error message for each > neighbor for which ingress or egress policy has not been set.
What if it is intentional? Why consider it an error? I see no benefit, and it would make the draft non-compatible with existing deployments aligned with the spirit of this draft. I don't see how 'one sentence' will benefit the ultimate goal of this draft. Leave that to the vendors. > I think the draft can be adopted (now) and these details can be worked > in later during WG deliberations on this draft. The draft was adopted December 28th 2015. :) Kind regards, Job _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
