On Tuesday, April 10, 2012 9:53 AM, Christopher Morrow <> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Robert Raszuk <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Anyhow my doubt has been answered and I stay by my opinion that not >> sending AS_PATH and AS4_PATH is a terrible idea. > > So... we can send the data along, but in the case of BGPSEC speakers > the data isn't used (it's replicated in the BGPSEC_SIGNED_PATH). > Carrying extra bits isn't actually helpful is it? (the implementers > drove the design decision here I believe)
I think it was along the lines of: 2 AS paths will create the opportunity for an error if they differ and we don't want to go around the error-handling block again. I agree with Robert. Today, there are many tools that interact with BGP messages. If the AS_PATH disappears, they will all break. -- Jakob Heitz. _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
