Re: [Idr] draft-chavali-bgp-prefixlimit-02.txt as an IDR WG document

[Vivek Menezes <vivek.menezes at gmail.com>]

> Could you please clarify whether (a) you are in favor or against
> accepting signalled prefix limit as an IDR WG item, and if yes,

It appears that we are unnecessarily making the protocol more complex with
no added advantage. The right thing for a peer to do when it reaches it maximum
configured number of prefixes is to shutdown the session. I like the
idea (not necessarily
the proposal ) of supporting multiple BGP sessions, with each session
for a different protocol, so that different protocols do not disrupt
each others.

passing around a signal between peers that adds no value in their
decision process
is unnecessary.

The answer is "NO"

Vivek.

> then (b) which of the two approaches (draft-chavali-bgp-prefixlimit-02.txt
> or draft-keyur-prefixlimit-orf-00.txt) would you favor.

_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
Idr at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr