[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Idr] BGP Peer Groups
Hello again,
I'm generally pleased with the response I've already received to the
rough draft on BGP peer groups. Here's a short summary:
* Someone from Cisco was interested in extending the draft to cover some
important challenges in the implementation of peer groups.
* Someone from SixXS.net suggested that maybe it should be a draft on
"BGP Dos and Don'ts".
* Someone from Sweden pointed out update groups, as did David Freedman
below.
* Someone from a Central-European ISP said that it's an implementation
issue and shouldn't be an Internet-Draft at all.
David Freedman wrote:
If you look at the IOS implementation, peer-groups have been decoupled
from "update groups" which are used to group peers to which common
updates are sent.
As an end user of the implementation you can configure the members of
the peer-group but the update-group membership remains internal to the
implementation.
Right.
Since there are many different type of groups one can have (same updates
to members, same transport, same timers etc..) would be interested as to
which you refer in these notes, if you really do mean "all" then you
want to revert the behaviour described above which puts control back to
the end user again.
I wrote the thing quite quickly. I was rather naive and thought only of
my needs for the other draft, which needs configuration level peer
groups rather than the more generic update groups.
I think at least update groups definitely fall within the scope of the
draft. Otherwise it's all still open.
One question I forgot to ask yesterday was:
Should this be experimental, informational, bcp or proposed standard?
From the responses I've received so far, I gather that it should be bcp.
A new question for today: can this be adopted as a working group
document, ever?
--
Aleksi Suhonen