[Idr] RFC5065 - Section 5.3

[David Freedman <david.freedman at uk.clara.net>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Admittedly I'm a little late for this now that draft-ietf-idr-rfc3065bis
is now an RFC, but I'm unclear as to why Section 5.3 (3) states:

3) When comparing routes using AS_PATH length, CONFED_SEQUENCE and
      CONFED_SETs SHOULD NOT be counted.

I would rather have said:

When comparing routes using AS_PATH length, an implementation MAY
provide the ability to count CONFED_SEQUENCE and CONFED_SET.


Looking back through the archives, I see Ilya Varlashkin has commented
on this previously :

(http://www.nabble.com/BGP-best-path-selection-in-confederations-(draft-ietf-idr-rfc3065bis-06.txt)-td11081109.html#a11081109)


I too run a network where each subconfederation has a discrete IGP and I
do not wish them to interact, an implementation which provides the
ability to count CONFED_SEQUENCE / CONFED_SET and use this for route
comparison would be extremely useful, I do not understand why the
author(s) have used "SHOULD NOT" in this case, it seems silly.

Can somebody explain?

Regards,

David Freedman


- --
David Freedman
Group Network Engineering
Claranet Limited
http://www.clara.net
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFIc281tFWeqpgEZrIRAuMRAJ0c326vMTO+C17me7QEuVqRt8JKMgCgjb7S
ucQOP5cSwu9jupiDdpMw++o=
=WcEY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
Idr at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr