On 29/07/13 09:02 -0400, Jon Mitchell wrote: > multiple use case drafts but likely only one BGP use case draft in the > WG. undertsood that the WG can direct the authors to include the > white use cases once WG adopted but I personally would like to know > their receptiveness to the use cases in the white draft, and it > appears others have posed the same question previously.
Based on my discussion with Keyur in person - I'm satisfied he will work with the the other authors to integrate WG relevant use cases from draft-white-i2rs-use-case-00 draft into the document if adopted, so I now support it's adoption. Here is my view on the differences between the drafts: I'd like to see Sections 3,5,6 from the white draft integrated. Section 3 overlaps some with content in keyupdate but does not specify using FlowSpec routes for DDoS diversion; presumably you could divert traffic directly through i2rs messaging (if such a thing will exist). Sections 2/7 are basically covered by the keyupdate doc, although certainly useful text could be merged. Use case in section 4 is not on my list, maybe others feel strongly for it. Thanks, -Jon _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
