Speaking as an individual, I am satisfied with the wording. Best, Lancheng
> -----Original Messages----- > From: "Sriram, > Kotikalapudi (Fed)" <[email protected]> > Send time:Monday, 08/05/2024 23:12:15 > To: "Ketan Talaulikar" <[email protected]> > Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, > "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: [Sidrops] Re: WG LC for > draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-as-set-confed-set-14 (7/8 to 7/ - call continues > from 7/8 to 7/26/2024 - 2nd extensions to 8/6 > > Hi Ketan, > > Thank you for meeting with the draft authors in a side-meeting in Vancouver > (IETF 120) to offer your comments. > > You gave us the following wording suggestion for inclusion in the draft: > > Unless explicitly configured by a network operator to do otherwise (e.g., > during a transition phase), BGP speakers > - MUST NOT advertise BGP UPDATE messages containing AS_SETs or > AS_CONFED_SETs, and > - Upon reception of BGP UPDATE messages containing AS_SETs or AS_CONFED_SETs, > MUST use the "treat-as-withdraw" error handling behavior as per [RFC7606]. > > This wording seems perfect and should satisfy many of the WG members who gave > feedback. AFAIK, the authors who met with you (Jeff, Warren, and I) agree > with your suggestion. I have included this text in my editor copy of the > draft replacing the first paragraph in Sec. 3 (v-14). We'll also make text > changes elsewhere in the draft where needed to be consistent with this > change. > > Sriram > > _______________________________________________ > Sidrops mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
