RE: [Idr] Inter-operable BGP implementations - Call for information

["Susan Hares" <shares at nexthop.com>]

Pekka:

In my earlier messages I assumed a context
from bgp-4 implementation report found
for your reading pleasure (and accessed
off the general IDR web page) at:

 draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-00.txt 

In that report (authored by Alvaro and
myself), we have 4 inter-operable (Alcatel,
Cisco, Laurel, NextHop) whose inventors
responded to 259 questions required to verify
all features of the protocols.
This required a significant investment
of time on for any implementer.  
All issues from RFC 2026 are covered
in that document. 

Since there are greater than four implementations
of BGP in existence, the small subset of
responses will be of concern to any
member of the IESG with functioning
and engaged cognitive processes.  

Informal reports to me indicated that
for an existing and deployed implementation, this
effort had value only for the continuation of
the IETF standard process.   In order to
provide appropriate input to the IESG on
general interoperability of BGP, I need to
widen the normal 2026 survey to
include those implementations that: 	

 a)Are inter-operable with other BGP implementation, and
 b)whose implementers found that answering 259
   questions on an existing and deployed 
   implementations was too daunting to
   complete.

Section 1.4 of the implementation report
deals with this issue.  At the time of the -00.txt
draft this was incomplete because I 
did not have enough time to get a significant
number of responses.  I am now asking for
those responses in the next 2 weeks. 

Does this make the request clear? 

Perhaps this two facts will also illuminate the
value of this request to the working group.
For example, neither Juniper or Redback's
implementers filled out an implementation report.
Juniper's support of BGP standardization process has
been evident by my esteemed co-chairs active
participation for years.  Other standards or
standards reports have been generated by 
many fine BGP implementers at Juniper or Redback.

I normally attempt to be brief and assume
a substantial amount of context from existing
documents.  Please send me feedback if I am
being to terse in the future.  

Sue 


	

-----Original Message-----
From: Pekka Savola [mailto:pekkas at netcore.fi]
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 1:52 AM
To: Susan Hares
Cc: idr at ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Idr] Inter-operable BGP implementations - Call for
information


On Thu, 20 May 2004, Susan Hares wrote:
> I am revising the BGP implementation survey, and
> need an updated on inter-operable implementations.
> I will accept input for 2 weeks ending 6/2/04.  
> At that time, I will release version -01 of the BGP
> implementation survey. 

FWIW, if you look at RFC2026, it's not sufficient that you have
interoperable implementations (in general), there must be two
interoperable implementations of _every feature_ of the spec.