Hi, Robert:

I would say some people are likely to hear other’s explanations, some are 
reluctant. 
Anyway, I am eager to hear the independent technical analysis.

For the current scenarios and solutions, we have analyzed that RFC 5316 and 
RFC5392 are not suitable for such purposes—we must generate bogus AS, bogus 
Remote ASBR Router ID on every inter-AS, or non inter-AS boundary links.

I would like to hear the constructive comments, or other solutions that better 
the the one in this draft.

Aijun Wang
China Telecom

> On Jan 15, 2022, at 07:15, Robert Raszuk <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi Aijun,
>  
>> If not, I would say both you and Les’s understanding of this draft is not 
>> correct.
> 
> If two (or more) subject matter experts like Les & John can not understand 
> the IGP draft I would not draw an immediate conclusion that this is their 
> perception fault. 
> 
> Instead I would take a step back and see that perhaps there is something 
> wrong with the draft itself ? 
> 
> Thx,
> Robert.
> 
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr

Reply via email to