Job: If this solution was good was the best solution, there is no further work.
If this solution was due to the slow progress of IDR, I'd like to know. We've been trying to fast track all operator needs. Sue -----Original Message----- From: Job Snijders [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 4:42 AM To: Christopher Morrow Cc: Susan Hares; [email protected] List; [email protected] [email protected] Subject: Re: [Idr] Are there IDR drafts the Grow WG needs completed quickly? On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:33:04AM +0200, Christopher Morrow wrote: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 9:57 AM, Susan Hares <[email protected]> wrote: > > As the IDR co-chairs sat in the grow meeting, we heard of an IDR > > draft that was so long in becoming an RFC that the Grow authors took > > another approach (which was less desired). > > I'm unsure what draft this is? this might be the gshut draft? GROW's draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut had a dependency on draft-ietf-idr-reserved-extended-communities which related to draft-ietf-idr-as4octet-extcomm-generic-subtype - eventually this was resolved by just working with RFC 1997 well-known communities. Kind regards, Job _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
