The IETF BGP YANG module authors would like to draw your collective attention
to a Working Group Last Call that has begun for the IETF BGP YANG module.
This module provides the base for core IETF BGP technologies, and will serve as
the primary point of extension for BGP-related technologies
On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 04:04:35PM -0300, Douglas Fischer wrote:
> About the cone definition (by AS-SET) of IXPs... This is an especially
> important thing.
> But, unless some external force come to push the IXPs to do it, I don't see
> that we will have that so soon.
The IXP would need to have a
> On Aug 19, 2021, at 9:04 AM, james jones wrote:
>
> PCRE or death. Tell me if I am wrong, but I thought PCRE was the most widely
> used regex lib these day anyways. I also thought it was already in Junos.
Junos is a very wide topic.
In Juniper's BGP implementation, there are two regular
> On Aug 19, 2021, at 12:18 AM, Douglas Fischer
> wrote:
>
> I agree that without combining prefix-list and as-path, the effectiveness of
> ORF, considering its initial purpose, the pros and cons does not pay
> themselves.
>
>
> But (there is always a but), I was imagining a different
ORFs are a challenging feature and haven't gotten a lot of deployment for a
number of reasons.
At a high level, they're a very coarse filter. Since each new ORF type adds to
the logical AND condition, you start having to be more and more permissive in
what you permit in the policy. Since a
> On Oct 21, 2019, at 4:17 PM, Brandon Martin wrote:
>
> On 10/21/19 3:37 PM, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
>> BGP over ipsec works fine. But that said, it's mostly done with pre-shared
>> keys.
>
> Is anybody actually doing it in practice?
Absolutely. In the SP sector
> On Oct 21, 2019, at 3:25 PM, Brandon Martin wrote:
>
> On 10/21/19 11:30 AM, Keith Medcalf wrote:
>> Why cannot one just put the MD5 authenticated connection inside a TLS
>> connection? What is the advantage to be gained by replacing the
>> authentication mechanism with weaker
Authors : Robert Raszuk
Jeffrey Haas
Andrew Lange
Shane Amante
Bruno Decraene
Paul Jakma
Richard A Steenbergen
Filename
Martin,
On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 10:06:31AM +0100, Martin Pels wrote:
Wide communities is the wrong tool here. You want this:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-idr-as4octet-extcomm-generic-subtype-06
This draft does not cater for the use case of describing a 32-bit ASN peering
with a
On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 09:02:52AM -0500, Jared Mauch wrote:
On Feb 5, 2014, at 8:52 AM, Jeffrey Haas jh...@pfrc.org wrote:
This draft does not cater for the use case of describing a 32-bit ASN
peering
with a 32-bit route server, which would require a 4-byte Global
Administrator
It's IETF stuff. Operator sanity check would probably be appreciated. :-)
-- Jeff
- Forwarded message from IAB Chair iab-ch...@iab.org -
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 11:16:56 -0500
From: IAB Chair iab-ch...@iab.org
To: IETF Announce ietf-annou...@ietf.org
Cc: IAB i...@iab.org, IETF
Sent from my iPad
On Jan 25, 2014, at 1:37 PM, Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote:
On 25/01/2014 15:48, Sebastian Spies wrote:
To make things worse: even if the IXPs ASN is 2-byte, I would assume,
that RS implementors chose to interpret extended community strings as
always being in the
Sent from my iPad
On Jan 25, 2014, at 5:50 PM, Randy Bush ra...@psg.com wrote:
http://tools.ietf.org/search/draft-raszuk-wide-bgp-communities-03
To me, that draft looks hugely complicated, like everything you
could possibly think of was thrown in.
aol
do we have a chat with robert or
. A reference
implementation in Quagga will likely follow.
-- Jeff
- Forwarded message from Jeffrey Haas [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2008 21:50:00 -0400
From: Jeffrey Haas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Idr] Configuration objects in BGP MIB v2: Call for consenus
14 matches
Mail list logo
