Stavros, On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 09:28:19AM +0000, Stavros Konstantaras wrote: > Thank you very much for your comment. As Job said, the draft is targeting the > Route Server infrastructure of Internet Exchange Points, but do you believe > that this is something that needs further clarification in the draft?
The changes for -01 does help tighten the scope of the document. Thanks for getting that addressed. > If by build-in scoping you are referring to the definitions of Global/Local > administrator, truth is that is not taken into consideration in such > deployments. I'm specifically addressing the extended community "transitive" bit. This can permit things that are signaled via the IXP route server to be dropped at the service provider's ASBRs. > Moreover, we know at least another IXP that dropped support for Extended > Communities 2 years ago with big success, thus adopting such a practice from > other fellow IXPs shouldn’t be of an issue as long as support for Large > Communities is in place. > So, this includes things like RPKI validation signaled by RFC 8097 done by the IXP RS? I have some more general comments that I'll address in reply to Job. -- Jeff _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list GROW@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
