Greetings:

The IDR would like input on whether the adoption call for 
draft-smn-idr-inter-domain-ibgp belongs in IDR, BESS, or both.  Please send 
your comments to the idr chairs 
([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>) or your friendly neighborhood 
BESS Chairs.   Of course, the WG chairs (BESS and IDR) would love to hear your 
opinions on this draft.

If BESS and IDR chairs decide this belongs in BESS alone, then the BESS chairs 
will take the lead on the next step.

Cheers, Sue

From: Susan Hares
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2026 11:55 AM
To: idr@ietf. org <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 2 week WG adoption for draft-smn-idr-inter-domain-ibgp (6/23/2026 to 
7/7/2026)

Greetings IDR WG:

This begins a 2 week WG Adoption call for draft-smn-idr-inter-domain-ibgp from 
6/23/2026 to 7/7/2026.

The editors (Krzysztof Szarkowicz and Moshiko Nayman) and the author (Israel 
Means) should respond to this email with an email indicating whether they know 
of any IPR related to this draft.

The abstract for this draft states:
    This document relaxes the recommendations specified in BGP/MPLS IP
   Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) and BGP Route Reflection: An
   Alternative to Full Mesh Internal BGP (IBGP) allowing the building of
   Inter-domain L3VPN architecture with internal BGP.

IDR WG members should consider if:

1)  Does the suggested "relaxation" of L3VPN specification cause any harm?
(see comments on RFC4364 in draft)

2)  Are the deployment use cases specified in the draft important to operators?
Are there other ways to address these use cases besides this technology?

3) Should IDR or BESS or both review this draft?

4) Should it be information or standards?

Cheerily, Sue Hares

_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to