Hi all,
On 10 Oct 2017 5:50 pm, Jay Borkenhagen wrote:
Job Snijders writes:
> > The LOCAL_PREF choice here is a simple thing -- don't make it more
> > complicated than it needs to be.
> >
> > Job's suggested text says all that's necessary:
> >
> > "The LOCAL_PREF
David Farmer writes:
> I would prefer a normative RECOMMENDED, the rest of the sentence in
> RFC2119, just means you should explain the constraints on the alternatives.
> How about something like this;
>
> "The LOCAL_PREF value SHOULD be lower than any of the alternative
> paths. A
On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 7:33 AM, wrote:
> > From: Job Snijders [mailto:j...@ntt.net]
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 2:00 PM
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 11:41:32AM +, bruno.decra...@orange.com
> wrote:
> > > > Any attribute (origin, as_path, aggregator)
Job,
> From: Job Snijders [mailto:j...@ntt.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 12:06 PM
>
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 09:56:45AM +, bruno.decra...@orange.com wrote:
> > > Minor issues:
> > >
> > > In Section 4. "EBGP graceful shutdown procedure", it states that 0
> > > can used in all
On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 09:56:45AM +, bruno.decra...@orange.com wrote:
> > Minor issues:
> >
> > In Section 4. "EBGP graceful shutdown procedure", it states that 0
> > can used in all cases except where the AS already has a special
> > meaning for 0. It seems to me more ought to be said, but
Reviewer: Matthew Miller
Review result: Ready with Issues
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.
For