I’m at least 90%, “Meh, whatever “ for the proposal as long as it doesn’t become a recommendation to filter the extended communities by default. For purposes of the adoption poll, consider this a conditional abstention.
The last 10% of my opinion is formed by the fact that extended communities have built-in scoping whereas large communities do not. There’s room for legitimate griping about policy tools to use extended communities, but those are implementation details. Jeff. Sent from my iPad > On Mar 11, 2024, at 15:13, Christopher Morrow <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Howdy WG folks! > The authors of: draft-spaghetti-grow-bcp-ext-comms > (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-spaghetti-grow-bcp-ext-comms/) > > are interested in seeking WG Adoption for their new missive. The > abstract is included here-in: > > "This document outlines a recommendation to the Internet operational > community to avoid the use of BGP Extended Communities in BGP > announcements. It includes guidance for both Internet Service > Provider networks and Internet Exchange Points (IXPs). This approach > aims to help the global Internet routing system's performance and > help protect Route Server participants against misconfigurations." > > Please give this document a read and consider if it should be adopted > for further work/use/revision/happy-fun-balling in our working-group. > > Ideally we'll close this adoption call out 4/8/2024 (the 8th day of > the 4th month of the year 2 thousand and twenty 4) > > Thanks! > -chris > co-chair N of M > > _______________________________________________ > GROW mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
