On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 12:00 AM, Shane Amante <[email protected]> wrote: > Nice try; however, you didn't address the crux of the matter, which are these > statements in the threats document:
ugh, i keep trying to be polite and point out that: 1) no one said you can't discuss this 2) no one said that leaks aren't a problem 3) the process to get this problem addressed was discussed and agreed upon in prague (I believe) - about 1yr ago in any effect. 4) continuously going around the mulberry bush isn't getting to a solution. please: 1) go get grow to agree that this is a problem (this should not be hard, apparently) 2) go get IDR to either provide the semantics in BGP OR aim you in another direction that does not include BGP as a transport/signaling protocol 3) if 2 == idr-work, happily bring that here so we can deal with it properly. -chris _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
