On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Paul Jakma <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 10 Apr 2012, Jakob Heitz wrote: > >> I agree with Robert. Today, there are many tools that interact with BGP >> messages. If the AS_PATH disappears, they will all break. > > > Indeed. If mandatory, well-known attributes are removed, then the BGP > protocol version number needs to be bumped. > > There's near-0-cost in doing that for those interested in implementing the > new functionality, and it avoids a world of hurt for all the various tools > (sometimes in-house/home-grown) out there that believe they know what > they're getting when the version says 4.
"if you don't ask for the 'bgpsec capability' then ... you get what you get today." also "if you ask for the 'bgpsec capabiltiy' then ... you get (and can presumably handle) the changes" so, everything you do today, ought to just keep right on working, or that's the plan. _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
