Russ,

> > Can every vendor sign with blood that their implementation and system
> > are properly designed for all situations ... unfortunately (for us) I
> > don't  think so :)
> 
> Which is why this would be a good BCP -- both for vendors and providers.

I'm not sure to exactly see your point. So let me expand into more details:

We don't need consistency between different AS/providers.
We need consistency within a given AS, across vendors.
BCP for existing _parameters_ do not solve the problem if we have different 
algorithm computing different values.
What we need is to standardize an algorithm. Is your point is that such 
document should be labeled as "IETF BCP" rather than "IETF standard track"? If 
so, I would tend to disagree as IMO this is required for interop.


Thanks,
Bruno
> 
> :-)
> 
> Russ
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rtgwg mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.

_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

Reply via email to