Subject: [Idr] AS hopcount draft

From: Tony Li <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 11:44:56 -0800

Hi all,

On the AS hopcount draft, we're in the middle of polling interest on  
having this
draft as a WG item.  This expires on Monday.  If you have an opinion,  
please voice
it now to the list.

Here's my summary of where we are, with both people and their  
affiliations.  If
any of these need correction, please unicast to me.

Authors:
Myself (SP)
Rex Fernando (Vendor emeritus)
Joe Abley (SP)

For:
Curtis Villamizar (Vendor?)
Paul Jakma (SP?)
Elmar Bins (SP?)
Robert Raszuk (Vendor)
Enke Chen (Vendor)
Kanchei Loa (SP/End user)
Geoff Huston (SP)
Danny McPherson (Vendor)

Against:
Pekka Savola (Vendor)

Tony

_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr

---

From: Dana Blair <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 14:57:59 -0500

> draft as a WG item.  This expires on Monday.  If you have an opinion, 

I support the draft.  It should be a working group item.

thanks,
Dana

---

From: Andrew Partan <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 15:28:40 -0500

On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 11:44:56AM -0800, Tony Li wrote:
> having this draft as a WG item.

I think it should be a WG item as well.

A note about AS_HOPCOUNT and NO_EXPORT; if you receive a route with
both AS_HOPCOUNT and NO_EXPORT attached, and you understand
AS_HOPCOUNT, then you should propogate the route with both AS_HOPCOUNT
and NO_EXPORT attached.  If the next AS does not understand
AS_HOPCOUNT, then the NO_EXPORT will stop the route there.
	--asp

---

From: Lea Roberts <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 15:05:47 -0800 (PST)

another view from the edge...
this looks like it could be useful
and so I think it should be a WG draft.

Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 15:05:47 -0800 (PST)
From: Lea Roberts <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Idr] AS hopcount draft
Sender: [email-masked]

another view from the edge...
this looks like it could be useful
and so I think it should be a WG draft.

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [Idr] AS hopcount draft
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 14:42:48 -0700
From: "Susan Hares" <[email-masked]>
To: "Drake, John E" <[email-masked]>, "Tony Li" <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Cc: 
Sender: [email-masked]

John:

Thanks for the input on the AS Hopcount draft.

Sue

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
Drake, John E
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 3:52 PM
To: Tony Li; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [Idr] AS hopcount draft

Yes

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tony Li [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 11:45 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [Idr] AS hopcount draft
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [Idr] AS hopcount draft
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 12:51:42 -0800
From: "Drake, John E" <[email-masked]>
To: "Tony Li" <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Cc: 
Sender: [email-masked]

Yes

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tony Li [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 11:45 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [Idr] AS hopcount draft
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 

Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 15:28:40 -0500
From: Andrew Partan <[email-masked]>
To: Tony Li <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] AS hopcount draft
Cc: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [Idr] AS hopcount draft
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 13:15:01 -0700
From: "Susan Hares" <[email-masked]>
To: "Dana Blair" <[email-masked]>, "Tony Li" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

Dana:

Thanks for the note.

Sue

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
Dana Blair
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 2:58 PM
To: Tony Li
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Idr] AS hopcount draft

thanks,
Dana

From: Dana Blair <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] AS hopcount draft
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 14:57:59 -0500
To: Tony Li <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

thanks,
Dana

To: [email-masked]
From: Tony Li <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 11:44:56 -0800
Subject: [Idr] AS hopcount draft
Sender: [email-masked]

Hi all,

Authors:
Myself (SP)

For:

Against:
Pekka Savola (Vendor)

Tony

Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 11:27:10 -0800
From: Enke Chen <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Cc: Susan Hares <[email-masked]>, Yakov Rekhter <[email-masked]>
Subject: [Idr] Implementation survey for draft-ietf-idr-avoid-transition-03.txt
Sender: [email-masked]

Hi, folks:

I am working on an implementation report for 
draft-ietf-idr-avoid-transition-03.txt.  It will be greatly appreciated 
if folks can fill out the attached survey form, and send to me by 
December 14, 2005.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implementation Forms
 
   Organization: 
 
   Person filling out this form:
 
   Implementation (Software Version):
 
   Does the implementation include all parts of the specification?
 
   Are there parts of the specification that are unclear for implementation?
  
   List other implementations that have been tested for interoperability.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Enke

Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 09:58:09 -0800
From: "Eccentrically D. Gaggles" <[email-masked]>
To: Idr <[email-masked]>
Subject: Borland Software and more. The best price.

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------------6256E2B3D7CDBC2
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 http://trvzuv.lfrbrgrwr18cc3li4o3yq333.mirecn.com

Software Compatibility

 Please check our prices. 

 Windows XP Professional - $69.95 
 Windows 2k Adv. Server - $69.95 
 Photoshop 7 - $60 
 Win XP Professional - $69.95 
 Microsoft Office 2k PE (2 CD Edition) - $59.95 
 LiveMotion 2.0 - $60 
 MS Picture It Premium 9 - $50 
 Microsoft Office 2000 Premium Edition (2 CD) - $59.95 
 Windows Millenium - $59.95 
 PhotoRetouch Pro 3.0 - $50 
 Acrobat 6.0 Pro - $70 
 Win NT 4.0 Server - $49.95 
 Director MX 2004 - $60 
 Windows NT 4.0 Terminal Server - $40 
 Premiere 7 - $60 

 Go to site
 http://rrr.b5z1zoh4zrgk2tt8cwb6ytbb.localizekf.com

------------6256E2B3D7CDBC2
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
<body>

<table align=center>
<tr><td align=center>
<strong align=center><a href="http://rrr.b5z1zoh4zrgk2tt8cwb6ytbb.localizekf.com">
<font size=4 color=#1213a7>
Want to buy almost free software? 
</a></strong>
</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center><font size=4>Check our reduced price.</td></tr>
</table>
<table align=center border=0>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Special Offers:</td></tr>
<tr><td>Bundle Special:Photoshop  + Premiere  + Illustrator </td><td>$129.95</td></tr><tr><td>Special Offer:MS Win XP Professional + MS Office XP Professional</td><td>$89.95</td></tr><tr><td>Bundle Special:Win XP Professional With SP2 Full Version + Office 2003 Professional (1 CD)</td><td>$99.95</td></tr><tr><td>Bundle Special:Macromedia Dreamwaver MX 2004 + Macromedia Flash MX 2004</td><td>$109.95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Microsoft|c| Windows|R| </td></tr>
<tr><td>Win 98</td><td>$49.95</td></tr><tr><td>Win NT 4.0 Terminal Server</td><td>$49.95</td></tr><tr><td>Win 2k Pro</td><td>$59.95</td></tr><tr><td>Win Millenium </td><td>$59.95</td></tr><tr><td>Win 98 Second Edition </td><td>$49.95</td></tr><tr><td>Win 2k Adv. Server </td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Win NT 4.0 Server </td><td>$49.95</td></tr><tr><td>Win XP Pro With SP2 Full Version</td><td>$79.95</td></tr><tr><td>Win 95</td><td>$49.95</td></tr><tr><td>Win XP Pro</td><td>$69.95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Microsoft|c| Office|R|:</td></tr>
<tr><td>Office XP Pro</td><td>$79.95</td></tr><tr><td>Microsoft Visio 2003 Pro</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Office 2003 Pro (1 CD Edition)</td><td>$89.95</td></tr><tr><td>FileMaker 7.0 Pro</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Office 97 SR2</td><td>$49.95</td></tr><tr><td>Office 2k PE (2 CD)</td><td>$59.95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Other Microsoft Software:</td></tr>
<tr><td>MS Exchange 2003 Enterprise Server</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td>MS Visual Studio .NET Architect Edition (8CD)</td><td>$139.95</tr></td><tr><td>MS Plus! XP</td><td>$59.95</tr></td><tr><td>MS Money 2004</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td>MS Works 7</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td>MS Project 2003 Pro</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td>MS Picture It Premium 9</td><td>$59.95</tr></td><tr><td>MS Streets and Trips 2004 North America (2 CD Edition)</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td>MS Encarta Encyclopedia Delux 2004 (3 CD)</td><td>$89.95</tr></td><tr><td>MS SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition</td><td>$69.95</tr></td>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Adobe Software for PC:</td></tr>
<tr><td> Illustrator 10 </td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td> Creative Suite Premium (5 CD Edition) </td><td>$149.95</td></tr><tr><td> Creative Suite Standard (3 CD) </td><td>$129.95</td></tr><tr><td> PageMaker 7 (2 CD) </td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td> Photoshop 7 </td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td> Photoshop CS with ImageReady CS </td><td>$99.95</td></tr><tr><td> Photoshop Elements 3.0 Windows </td><td>$59.95</td></tr><tr><td> Premiere 7 </td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td> InDesign CS PageMaker Edition (2 CD) </td><td>$69.95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Adobe Software for Mac:</td></tr>
<tr><td>Adobe Actobat 6.0 Professional (Mac)</td><td>$79.95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe Premiere 6.5 (Mac)</td><td>$89.95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe LiveMotion 2.0 (Mac)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe Photoshop CS (Mac)</td><td>$99.95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe Illustrator CS CE (Mac)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe After Effects 6.0 (Mac)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe InDesign CS (Mac)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Macromedia Software for PC:</td></tr>
<tr><td>Macromedia Fireworks MX 2004</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td>Macromedia Freehand MX 11</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td>Macromedia Flash MX 2004</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td>Macromedia Dreamwaver MX 2004</td><td>$69.95</tr></td>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Macromedia Software for Mac:</td></tr>
<tr><td> Flash MX 2004 (Mac)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td> Director MX 2004 (Mac)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td> Studio MX 2004 with Director MX 2004 (Mac)</td><td>$139.95</td></tr><tr><td> Dreamweaver MX 2004 (Mac)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td> FreeHand MX (Mac)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td> Fireworks MX 2004 (Mac)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Corel Software:</td></tr>
<tr><td>Corel WordPerfect Office </td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Corel Draw Graphics Suite 11.0</tr><td>$59.95</td></tr><tr><td>Corel Photo Painter 8</td><td>$59.95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>

</table>
<table align=center>
<tr><td align=center>
<a href="http://alnj.wqkm29kp2uj55wetxhw9jeee.rinnerih.com"><h3><font size=3 color=#212346>Push here</font></h3></a>

</td></tr>
</table>
</body>
</html>

------------6256E2B3D7CDBC2--

Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 01:47:34 -0800
From: "Drained O. Catechized" <[email-masked]>
To: Idr <[email-masked]>
Subject: Popular software at low prices.

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------------5BA0F7E150D04B4
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 http://nbd.lx9d9sqe939ucl30m6ly83ll.fulvidcd.com

Corel Software and more. The best price.

 Check out our pricelist. 

 FreeHand MX - $60 
 MS SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition - $60 
 MS FileMaker 7.0 Professional - $69.95 
 Microsoft Visio 2003 Professional - $69.95 
 PhotoRetouch Pro 3.0 - $50 
 Windows 98 - $40 
 Microsoft Office XP Professional - $79.95 
 Microsoft Office 2000 Premium Edition (2 CD) - $59.95 
 Microsoft Visio 2003 Professional - $69.95 
 Flash MX 2004 - $60 
 MS Office 2000 PE (2 CD Edition) - $59.95 
 Windows 98 Second Edition - $40 
 MS Office 2003 Professional (1 CD Edition) - $89.95 
 Windows Millenium - $59.95 
 Windows 2k Pro - $59.95 

 Check it
 http://gnaxz.3x9d9aqwrlrcul3im6ly8ll3.oem945.com

------------5BA0F7E150D04B4
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
<body>

<table align=center>
<tr><td align=center>
<strong align=center><a href="http://cpwuope.uo0m01hn0uillccrdxu7huuu.frowzyfk.com">
<font size=4 color=#1213a7>
Macromedia Software and more. The best price.
</a></strong>
</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center><font size=4>Check our prices.</td></tr>
</table>
<table align=center border=0>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Special Offers:</td></tr>
<tr><td>Bundle Special:Win XP Pro With SP2 Full Version + Office 2003 Pro (1 CD)</td><td>$99.95</td></tr><tr><td>Special Offer:Microsoft Win XP Pro + Microsoft Office XP Pro</td><td>$89.95</td></tr><tr><td>Bundle Special:Photoshop  + Premiere  + Illustrator </td><td>$129.95</td></tr><tr><td>Bundle Special:Macromedia Dreamwaver MX 2004 + Macromedia Flash MX 2004</td><td>$109.95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Microsoft|R| Windows </td></tr>
<tr><td>Windows NT 4.0 Server </td><td>$49.95</td></tr><tr><td>Windows Millenium </td><td>$59.95</td></tr><tr><td>Windows 2k Adv. Server </td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Windows XP Professional</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Windows 98 SE </td><td>$49.95</td></tr><tr><td>Windows 98</td><td>$49.95</td></tr><tr><td>Windows 2k Professional</td><td>$59.95</td></tr><tr><td>Windows XP Professional With SP2 Full Version</td><td>$79.95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Microsoft|R| Office:</td></tr>
<tr><td>MS Visio 2003 Pro</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Office 97 SR2</td><td>$49.95</td></tr><tr><td>Office 2003 Pro (1 CD Edition)</td><td>$89.95</td></tr><tr><td>Office 2k PE (2 CD)</td><td>$59.95</td></tr><tr><td>FileMaker 7.0 Pro</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Office XP Pro</td><td>$79.95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Other Microsoft|R| Software:</td></tr>
<tr><td>Microsoft Visual Studio .NET Architect Edition (8CD)</td><td>$139.95</tr></td><tr><td>Microsoft Exchange 2003 Enterprise Server</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td>Microsoft Money 2004</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td>Microsoft Plus! XP</td><td>$59.95</tr></td><tr><td>Microsoft Streets and Trips 2004 North America (2 CD Edition)</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td>Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia Delux 2004 (3 CD Edition)</td><td>$89.95</tr></td><tr><td>Microsoft Project 2003 Pro</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td>Microsoft Works 7</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td>Microsoft SQL Server 2k Enterprise Edition</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td>Microsoft Picture It Premium 9</td><td>$59.95</tr></td>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Adobe Software for PC:</td></tr>
<tr><td>Adobe InDesign CS PageMaker Edition (2 CD) </td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe Photoshop Elements 3.0 Win </td><td>$59.95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe Photoshop 7 </td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe Creative Suite Standard (3 CD) </td><td>$129.95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe Creative Suite Premium (5 CD Edition) </td><td>$149.95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe Premiere 7 </td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe Photoshop CS with ImageReady CS </td><td>$99.95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe PageMaker 7 (2 CD) </td><td>$69.95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Adobe Software for Mac:</td></tr>
<tr><td> After Effects 6 (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td> Illustrator CS CE (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td> Premiere 6.5 (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$89.95</td></tr><tr><td> InDesign CS (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td> Photoshop CS (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$99.95</td></tr><tr><td> Actobat 6 Professional (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$79.95</td></tr><tr><td> LiveMotion 2.0 (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Macromedia Software for PC:</td></tr>
<tr><td> Flash MX 2004</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td> Fireworks MX 2004</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td> Freehand MX 11</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td> Dreamwaver MX 2004</td><td>$69.95</tr></td>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Macromedia Software for Mac:</td></tr>
<tr><td> Fireworks MX 2004 (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td> Director MX 2004 (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td> Dreamweaver MX 2004 (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td> FreeHand MX (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td> Flash MX 2004 (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td> Studio MX 2004 with Director MX 2004 (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$139.95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Corel Software:</td></tr>
<tr><td> WordPerfect Office </td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td> Draw Graphics Suite 11 (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$59.95</td></tr><tr><td> Photo Painter 8</td><td>$59.95</td></tr><tr><td> Photo Painter 8 (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$59.95</td></tr><tr><td> Draw Graphics Suite 11</td><td>$59.95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>

</table>
<table align=center>
<tr><td align=center>
<a href="http://gnaxz.3x9d9aqwrlrcul3im6ly8ll3.oem945.com"><h3><font size=3 color=#212346>See more</font></h3></a>

</td></tr>
</table>
</body>
</html>

------------5BA0F7E150D04B4--

From: Danny McPherson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] 4 octet AS extended communities as an IDR WG document
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 14:43:01 -0700
To: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

On Nov 22, 2005, at 12:43 PM, Yakov Rekhter wrote:

> Folks,
>
> I'd like to ask the WG to accept
> draft-rekhter-as4octet-ext-community-00.txt as an IDR WG document.
>
> Please note that silence will be interpreted as lack of interest in  
> this
> case, so if you believe this document is useful -- please speak up.

I'm in favor of making it a WG item.

-danny

From: "DUBOIS Nicolas ROSI/DAS/ARI" <[email-masked]>
To: JACQUENET Christia RD-TCH <[email-masked]>, "'Yakov Rekhter'" <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [Idr] 4 octet AS extended communities as an IDR WG document
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 13:58:38 +0100
Cc: 
Sender: [email-masked]

I think the document can be adopted.

I think it's useful ;-)

Nicolas Dubois
Tel :  0144442817

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] De la
> part de JACQUENET Christia RD-TCH
> Envoyé : mercredi 23 novembre 2005 13:38
> À : Yakov Rekhter; [email-masked]
> Objet : RE: [Idr] 4 octet AS extended communities as an IDR
> WG document
>
> Folks,
>
> I'm in favor of adopting this document by the WG.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Christian.
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] De la
> part de Yakov Rekhter Envoyé : mardi 22 novembre 2005 20:43 À
> : [email-masked] Objet : [Idr] 4 octet AS extended communities
> as an IDR WG document
>
> Folks,
>
> I'd like to ask the WG to accept
> draft-rekhter-as4octet-ext-community-00.txt as an IDR WG document.
>
> Please note that silence will be interpreted as lack of
> interest in this case, so if you believe this document is
> useful -- please speak up.
>
> The deadline for response is Dec 5, 2005
>
> Yakov.
>
>

***********************************
Ce message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le "message") sont confidentiels et etablis a l'intention exclusive de
ses destinataires.
Toute utilisation ou diffusion non autorisee est interdite.
Tout message electronique est susceptible d'alteration. Le Groupe France Telecom decline toute responsabilite au titre de
ce message s'il a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie.
Si vous n'etes pas destinataire de ce message, merci de le detruire immediatement et d'avertir l'expediteur.
***********************************
This message and any attachments (the "message") are confidential and intended solely for the addressees. Any unauthorised
use or dissemination is prohibited.
Messages are susceptible to alteration. France Telecom Group shall not be liable for the message if altered, changed or
falsified.
If you are not receiver of this message, please cancel it immediately and inform the sender.
***********************************

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [Idr] 4 octet AS extended communities as an IDR WG document
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 13:38:13 +0100
From: "JACQUENET Christian RD-TCH-REN" <[email-masked]>
To: "Yakov Rekhter" <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Cc: 
Sender: [email-masked]

Folks,

I'm in favor of adopting this document by the WG.

Cheers,

Christian. 

-----Message d'origine-----
De : [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] De la part de Yakov Rekhter
Envoyé : mardi 22 novembre 2005 20:43
À : [email-masked]
Objet : [Idr] 4 octet AS extended communities as an IDR WG document

Folks,

I'd like to ask the WG to accept
draft-rekhter-as4octet-ext-community-00.txt as an IDR WG document.

Please note that silence will be interpreted as lack of interest in this case, so if you believe this document is useful -- please speak up.

The deadline for response is Dec 5, 2005

Yakov.

Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 15:45:47 -0800
From: Enke Chen <[email-masked]>
To: Yakov Rekhter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] 4 octet AS extended communities as an IDR WG document
Cc: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

The draft completes a missing piece for using the 4byte AS number.  So 
it should be accepted as an IDR WG document.

-- Enke

Yakov Rekhter wrote:

>Folks,
>
>I'd like to ask the WG to accept
>draft-rekhter-as4octet-ext-community-00.txt as an IDR WG document.
>
>Please note that silence will be interpreted as lack of interest in this
>case, so if you believe this document is useful -- please speak up.
>
>The deadline for response is Dec 5, 2005
>
>Yakov.
>
>

Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 15:33:45 -0800
From: Robert Raszuk <[email-masked]>
Organization: Signature: http://www.employees.org/~raszuk/sig/
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Idr] 4 octet AS extended communities as an IDR WG document
Cc: Yakov Rekhter <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

IMHO it should be a WG doc.

Cheers,
R.

> Folks,
> 
> I'd like to ask the WG to accept
> draft-rekhter-as4octet-ext-community-00.txt as an IDR WG document.
> 
> Please note that silence will be interpreted as lack of interest in this
> case, so if you believe this document is useful -- please speak up.
> 
> The deadline for response is Dec 5, 2005
> 
> Yakov.
> 
> 

Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 13:43:57 -0800 (PST)
From: Tony Tauber <[email-masked]>
To: Danny McPherson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)
Cc: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

On Fri, 18 Nov 2005, Danny McPherson wrote:

>
> On Nov 18, 2005, at 2:13 PM, Geoff Huston wrote:
>
>> I'm in favour of adopting the hop count draft
>
>
> I believe it's generally useful and a worthwhile WG item as well.
>
> -danny

Yes, let's adopt.

Tony

Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 22:25:00 +0100
From: "Elmar K. Bins" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Idr] 4 octet AS extended communities as an IDR WG document
Organization: unorganized since 1789
Sender: [email-masked]

[email-masked] (Yakov Rekhter) wrote:

> I'd like to ask the WG to accept
> draft-rekhter-as4octet-ext-community-00.txt as an IDR WG document.
> 

I believe this document is necessary.

Elmar.

From: Joe Abley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] 4 octet AS extended communities as an IDR WG document
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 14:58:49 -0500
To: Yakov Rekhter <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

On 22-Nov-2005, at 14:43, Yakov Rekhter wrote:

> Folks,
>
> I'd like to ask the WG to accept
> draft-rekhter-as4octet-ext-community-00.txt as an IDR WG document.
>
> Please note that silence will be interpreted as lack of interest in  
> this
> case, so if you believe this document is useful -- please speak up.

I believe this document is useful.

From: Tony Li <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] 4 octet AS extended communities as an IDR WG document
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 11:53:09 -0800
To: Yakov Rekhter <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

On Nov 22, 2005, at 11:43 AM, Yakov Rekhter wrote:

> Folks,
>
> I'd like to ask the WG to accept
> draft-rekhter-as4octet-ext-community-00.txt as an IDR WG document.
>
> Please note that silence will be interpreted as lack of interest in  
> this
> case, so if you believe this document is useful -- please speak up.

I believe this document is useful.

Tony

To: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 11:43:05 -0800
From: Yakov Rekhter <[email-masked]>
Subject: [Idr] 4 octet AS extended communities as an IDR WG document
Sender: [email-masked]

Folks,

I'd like to ask the WG to accept
draft-rekhter-as4octet-ext-community-00.txt as an IDR WG document.

Please note that silence will be interpreted as lack of interest in this
case, so if you believe this document is useful -- please speak up.

The deadline for response is Dec 5, 2005

Yakov.

To: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 11:40:05 -0800
From: Yakov Rekhter <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [Idr] wg minutes
Sender: [email-masked]

Folks,

Attached are the WG minutes. Please review them for
correctness. The deadline for comments is Dec 2, 2005.

Sue & Yakov.
----------------------------------------------------------------
IDR IETF 64

Minutes taken by Larry Blunk and Dave Ward
-------------
0. Doc Status (Sue Hares, Yakov Rekhter)

a. new draft to be reissued for 4-octet AS
b. AS Confeds - implementation report submitted and spec will go as DS
c. GR - post AD comments to PS
d. RR - have IESG comments, revised draft sub. and back to editor
e. 1863 went to historic
f. ton of stuff on editor queue (all to be pub'ed as package vs individual
docs)
g. MPBGP, Cease notify at editor
h. a lot no progress (see slides) due to lack of implementation report

Enke Chen: agreed to produce implementation report for outbound route filtering 

Pekka Savola: what is status of BGP MIB v2
Sue Hares: need two implementations
Yakov Rekhter: no implemenation report ... no progress

-------------
1. 4-octet AS extended commmunity - Yakov Rekhter
(no slides) 

Extended community needs to be able to support 4 byte ASN ext comm

Existing extended communities documnet removed text on 4 octet AS
extended communities, as there are no implementations.

New doc published for support (to not get in way of extended community
doc)

New doc produced via cut and paste protocol

It is currently an individual submission

Could be WG doc but, it will sit until any implementations

Geoff Huston: It should be a WG draft

Resulution: will send to mailing list and see if there is support
to making it a WG document

1A. YR request from Tony Li to make AS hop count a WG document
sent to list and only got few replies asked room ... no concensus ... not WG
doc yet

-------------
2. ORF groups  Sue Hares

See slides  for structure of UPDATE

See slides for usage scenarios

Geoff Huston: You have small parts of a boolean language ... why
not go all the way?

Sue: We were told during the last two meetings that we should shrink
back the functionality

Geoff Huston: Just add groups in groups and go for full boolean
logic

We have had a lot of arguments/discussion on this topic and request
more input.

Geoff Huston: Can't determine beforehand how complex someone may
want to get

Vach Kompella: What about other operands? E.g. "Not"

Need to see what you want or we are going full bore ...

Enke Chen: If goal is to simplify config .. .but, ORF originally
was not to simplify config but, to improve performance. It is unclear
how the config is simplified.

Sue Hares: It is an effort to expand power of config

Kireeti Kompella: The language is not boolean complete

Rudiger: The language helps the pain w/ config

Resolution: Will take back comments about missing functionality and
update draft and bring to WG.

-------------
3. Context AF - David Ward

See slides

Yakov: Clarification if we need to have larger work in IETF

David Ward: It is not dependent on that work and can work with existing
technology. A document will be written that associates diffserv architecture
to this work.

Sue - this looks like old IDR QOS revisited.   Dave - what's new
is always old.  Divergent from QOS bit.  Semantic free and opaque.
Service 42 is available but no meaning to semantics.  Sue - are you
mixing QOS pieces?

Sue - timeliness issue.  How do you ensure announcement is there
in time.

Chandra - could be useful to an application to group together
prefix/service - don't need to go to IANA.

Yakov - will you have different SAFI values for different AFI's?

Dave - could negotiate to RD's are all the way down to RT's, but
less flexible.

Yakov - bigger picture does not belong in IDR, only BGP changes.
Should the bigger picture come first ?

Sue - is all you are asking for is a different AFI?   Dave - Yes.
Add path and aggregate. withdraw would help, but not truly necessary.

Sue - AD's what is process for new AFI?   Bill - it says nothing,
would be sent to IESG which would send to back IDR.

Yakov - would IESG like to see big picture?  Alex Zinin - not ready
to answer that question, would like to see discussion on list. Dave
- propose MAVs BOF to discuss QOS things not related to BGP. Dave
- this is indepedent.  Alex - if working group discusses and believes
it can be used for other technologies and there is strong support.
Dave - I don't believe there are dependencies between outcome of
MAVs BOF and this proposal. Alex - sounds like discussion and
consensus is needed. Bruce Davie from Cisco - feels work does stand
alone if you assume there is a diffserv architecture; can look at
diffserv architecture for big picture context. Yakov - can someone
write document about how this fits into diffserv ?  Bruce will find
someone to do that.

-------------
4. Enke Chen - Extended Open Parameters

See slides
Problem ... we are running out of capability space

NAME? How does it work w/ ORF

Enke: It should work just fine. I don't understand.

Sue - were state machine changes included?   John promised to do
it. Needed to move forward.

Enke - should this become a WG item?  Don't need it today, but could
be important tomorrow.  Only 4 or so have read.

Yakov: need more people to read before progressing. Work will not
be done if no interest.

-------------
5. Chandra Appanna - Aggregate Withdraw

See slides

Ron Bonica - is there mechanism to ensure that you only withdraw
routes that you announce?  Chandra - routes are only for a particular
session.  Current draft is not transitive, but it could be so.

Yakov - time-to-withdraw could be used without agg. withdraw.
Chandra - yes.

Pekka - if we are using Secure BGP or SOBGP will it require special
processing?  Chandra - no, but haven't thought about it.

Sue - how does this relate to withdraw bags of routes, not sure.
Will take offline.

Dave - with agg. withdraw you match on attributes unlike bags. Could
be ASPATH, Origin, etc.  Chandra - designed to be general.

Yakov - could mark and organize by extended communities instead.
If you use communities, it will be easily transitive. Do we need
the others? Dave - if it's too much flexilibility, that's okay.
Dave - WG could determine that only communities are needed.

Yakov - not clear how to propagate agg. withdraw if applied to
things other than communities.   Will take this offline.

WG needs to decide if it wants to propagate agg. withdraw.

-------------
6. Gargi Nalawade - Tunneling applications

see slides

Yakov: Connector attribute carries a shortand for the tunnel, not just the
endpoint

Gargi: Yes

Yakov: It is even more than shortand but, a list of preferences for a set of
tunnels

Gargi: Yes, there is nothing in the draft that prevents this from happening

Yakov: Most work going on in L3VPN but, IDR will oversee

-------------
7. Gargi Nalawade - Multicast signaling using BGP

see slides

No comments

To: Bill Fenner <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 06:31:29 -0800
From: Yakov Rekhter <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-rfc3065bis-05.txt to Draft Standard
Sender: [email-masked]

Alex and Bill,

The IDR WG would like to ask IESG to advance
draft-ietf-idr-rfc3065bis-05.txt to Draft Standard. The implementation
report is draft-mcpherson-idr-rfc3065bis-impl-00.txt.

Sue & Yakov.

Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 04:51:24 -0800
From: "Fables B. Consignments" <[email-masked]>
To: Idr <[email-masked]>
Subject: Want to buy almost free software? 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------------CEF04F66BF46CC4
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 http://junvn.0u6s675t6iorr00f130v5ii0.stamplecf.com

Looking for cheap licensed software ? Buy OEM and dont think more!

 Please check our price-list. 

 Win XP Professional - $69.95 
 Microsoft FileMaker 7.0 Pro - $69.95 
 MS Office 2003 Professional (1 CD) - $89.95 
 Dreamweaver MX 2004 - $60 
 Corel Photo Painter 8 - $50 
 Windows 2000 Pro - $59.95 
 MS Office 97 SR2 - $49.95 
 Win NT 4.0 Server - $49.95 
 Windows XP Professional - $69.95 
 Director MX 2004 - $60 
 Windows 98 SE - $49.95 
 Win NT 4.0 Terminal Server - $49.95 
 Office 2003 Professional (1 CD Edition) - $80 
 Quark Xpress 6 Passport Multilanguage - $60 
 Illustrator CS CE - $60 

 Get to site
 http://junvn.0u6s675t6iorr00f130v5ii0.stamplecf.com

------------CEF04F66BF46CC4
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
<body>

<table align=center>
<tr><td align=center>
<strong align=center><a href="http://xlkay.coimi1znic03lcc9vfu7huuc.oem945.com">
<font size=4 color=#1213a7>
Looking for a cheap high-quality software?
</a></strong>
</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center><font size=4>Please check our price-list.</td></tr>
</table>
<table align=center border=0>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Special Offers:</td></tr>
<tr><td>Bundle Special:Photoshop  + Premiere  + Illustrator </td><td>$129.95</td></tr><tr><td>Bundle Special:Microsoft Windows XP Pro + Microsoft Office XP Pro</td><td>$89.95</td></tr><tr><td>Bundle Special:Dreamwaver MX 2004 + Flash MX 2004</td><td>$109.95</td></tr><tr><td>Bundle Special:Windows XP Pro With SP2 Full Version + Office 2003 Pro (1 CD)</td><td>$99.95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Microsoft|R| Windows|R| </td></tr>
<tr><td>Windows XP Pro With SP2 Full Version</td><td>$79.95</td></tr><tr><td>Windows XP Pro</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Windows NT 4.0 Terminal Server</td><td>$49.95</td></tr><tr><td>Windows 98 SE </td><td>$49.95</td></tr><tr><td>Windows 95</td><td>$49.95</td></tr><tr><td>Windows 2000 Advanced Server </td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Windows 2000 Pro</td><td>$59.95</td></tr><tr><td>Windows Millenium </td><td>$59.95</td></tr><tr><td>Windows NT 4.0 Server </td><td>$49.95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Microsoft Office:</td></tr>
<tr><td>FileMaker 7.0 Pro</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Office XP Pro</td><td>$79.95</td></tr><tr><td>MS Visio 2003 Pro</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Office 2003 Pro (1 CD)</td><td>$89.95</td></tr><tr><td>Office 2k Premium Edition (2 CD Edition)</td><td>$59.95</td></tr><tr><td>Office 97 SR2</td><td>$49.95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Other Microsoft|c| Software:</td></tr>
<tr><td>MS SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td>MS Works 7</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td>MS Project 2003 Pro</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td>MS Exchange 2003 Enterprise Server</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td>MS Plus! XP</td><td>$59.95</tr></td><tr><td>MS Streets and Trips 2004 North America (2 CD)</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td>MS Money 2004</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td>MS Encarta Encyclopedia Delux 2004 (3 CD)</td><td>$89.95</tr></td><tr><td>MS Visual Studio .NET Architect Edition (8CD)</td><td>$139.95</tr></td><tr><td>MS Picture It Premium 9</td><td>$59.95</tr></td>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Adobe Software for PC:</td></tr>
<tr><td>Adobe Photoshop 7 </td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe InDesign CS PageMaker Edition (2 CD) </td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe Illustrator 10 </td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe Creative Suite Premium (5 CD) </td><td>$149.95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe Creative Suite Standard (3 CD Edition) </td><td>$129.95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe Photoshop CS with ImageReady CS </td><td>$99.95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe PageMaker 7 (2 CD) </td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe Premiere 7 </td><td>$69.95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Adobe Software for Mac:</td></tr>
<tr><td>Adobe Premiere 6.5 (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$89.95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe Photoshop CS (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$99.95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe InDesign CS (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe Actobat 6.0 Pro (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$79.95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe After Effects 6.0 (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Macromedia Software for PC:</td></tr>
<tr><td>Macromedia Freehand MX 11</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td>Macromedia Dreamwaver MX 2004</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td>Macromedia Fireworks MX 2004</td><td>$69.95</tr></td><tr><td>Macromedia Flash MX 2004</td><td>$69.95</tr></td>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Macromedia Software for Mac:</td></tr>
<tr><td>Macromedia FreeHand MX (Mac)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Macromedia Flash MX 2004 (Mac)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Macromedia Dreamweaver MX 2004 (Mac)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Macromedia Fireworks MX 2004 (Mac)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr><tr><td>Macromedia Studio MX 2004 with Director MX 2004 (Mac)</td><td>$139.95</td></tr><tr><td>Macromedia Director MX 2004 (Mac)</td><td>$69.95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=center colspan=2>Corel Software:</td></tr>
<tr><td> Draw Graphics Suite 11.0 (Mac)</td><td>$59.95</td></tr><tr><td> Photo Painter 8.0 (Mac)</td><td>$59.95</td></tr><tr><td> Photo Painter 8.0</td><td>$59.95</td></tr><tr><td> Draw Graphics Suite 11.0</td><td>$59.95</td></tr><tr><td> WordPerfect Office </td><td>$69.95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>

</table>
<table align=center>
<tr><td align=center>
<a href="http://fmbxkqik.4gswatrfamadd44j57mz9mm4.enlifejm.com"><h3><font size=3 color=#212346>Push here</font></h3></a>

</td></tr>
</table>
</body>
</html>

------------CEF04F66BF46CC4--

Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 14:33:35 -0500
From: John Leslie <[email-masked]>
To: Yakov Rekhter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] 4 bytes AS to PS
Cc: Bill Fenner <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

Yakov Rekhter <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> The IDR WG would like to ask the IESG to advance
> draft-ietf-idr-as4bytes-12.txt to a Proposed Standard.
> The implementation report is draft-huston-idr-as4bytes-survey-00.txt

   IMHO, as4bytes-12 is not ready to advance as written.

   Section 4 states a NEW BGP speaker "MAY" advertise the 4-byte-ASN
capability, thus allowing non-4byte sessions between NEW BGP speakers.
The rest of Section 4 states rules in terms of whether a speaker is
NEW or OLD, rather than in terms of whether the session is 2-byte or
4-byte. IMHO the "MAY" should be a "MUST", or we need to restate
many of the Section 4 rules in terms of session type.

   Section 6 leaves an unresolved potential-routing-loop situation
without any recommended action. (I would guess dropping the NLRI is
the most appropriate action, but I dislike guessing...)

   Clearly there are possible situations in which an AS_TRANS can fail
to be resolved to its corresponding 4-byte ASN. IMHO, there should be
a statement that a NEW BGP speaker whose ASN is >65535 which receives
an unresolved AS_TRANS SHOULD discard that NLRI as a possible loop.

   The "SHALL be constructed" rule in Section 4.2.3 requires generating
(4-byte) AS_PATHs which could easily be known to be inconsistent. IMHO,
this spec should at least allow such situations to discard the NLRI (or
leave the AS_TRANS wherever it is found in the 2-byte AS_PATH).

   (I am sorry to have taken so long to respond -- it was hard to find
time to carefully read as4bytes-12 to make sure I understood things.)

--
John Leslie <[email-masked]>

From: Danny McPherson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux) 
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 15:29:49 -0700
To: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

On Nov 18, 2005, at 2:13 PM, Geoff Huston wrote:

> I'm in favour of adopting the hop count draft

I believe it's generally useful and a worthwhile WG item as well.

-danny

Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 08:13:57 +1100
To: [email-masked]
From: Geoff Huston <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux) 
Sender: [email-masked]

I'm in favour of adopting the hop count draft

   Geoff

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 00:55:53 -0800
From: "Loa, Kanchei" <[email-masked]>
To: "Pekka Savola" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], Tony Li <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

>> These demanding constraints are basic operation requirements in the
US 
>> defense internet. The AS hopcount will be a useful to control routing

>> policy in such a tightly regulated environment.
>
> I'd expect tightly regulated environments have a much higher security 
> requirements, and I doubt dependence on interpretation of a new 
> attribute is sufficient.  If I were participating in such an 
> environment, I'd be setting up very tight prefix-list and/or AS-path 
> filters at the edges.

You are right that it is not sufficient for routing security, which is a
completely different beast in such environment. This draft simply
provide extra BGP tool to control the fine-grained prefix propagation
and reduce the size of global routing table without the need to
configure prefix filtering at every possible choke points and
re-configure them again whenever there is a new prefix added.

Kanchei
---------------------------------------------
Kanchei Loa
The Boeing Company

Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 08:20:39 +0200 (EET)
From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
To: "Loa, Kanchei" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)
Cc: [email-masked], Tony Li <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005, Loa, Kanchei wrote:
> These demanding constraints are basic operation requirements in the US
> defense internet. The AS hopcount will be a useful to control routing
> policy in such a tightly regulated environment.

I'd expect tightly regulated environments have a much higher security 
requirements, and I doubt dependence on interpretation of a new 
attribute is sufficient.  If I were participating in such an 
environment, I'd be setting up very tight prefix-list and/or AS-path 
filters at the edges.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

From: Joe Abley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 19:48:11 -0500
To: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], Tony Li <[email-masked]>, Paul Jakma <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

On 17-Nov-2005, at 13:33, Pekka Savola wrote:

> On Thu, 17 Nov 2005, Paul Jakma wrote:
>
>> The 2 hop case certainly seems something that it'd be useful to  
>> specify formally (beyond any AS-specific 'action' communities  
>> offered by some ASes today).
>
> But is that useful enough to fulfill the intended policy?   
> Someone's policy could be for example, "I want to only get regional  
> or national traffic via this advertisement".  This mechanism does  
> not fulfill that goal, as the site who sends the community has to  
> (AFAICS) both:
>
>  1) know the network topology to the depth of $HOPCOUNT AS numbers,  
> and
>  2) know which ones implement AS-hopcount
>
> These are very demanding constraints and I doubt it offers a very  
> useful tool for affecting intended (more fine-grained) policy.

I agree it is no magic bullet.

The problem at the moment for people who wish to experiment with  
short-distance propagation of routes is that there are very few tools  
in the toolbox; there's NO_EXPORT and there's ad-hoc community  
attribute support from various providers, which is expensive to  
implement if you have a lot of external sessions.

The AS_HOPCOUNT attribute is a differently-shaped screwdriver, but  
nobody should expect it to fit every single kind of screw.

The toolbox is currently so empty that any additional tools would be  
welcome, however.

> But maybe the goal of AS hopcount isn't that, but rather something  
> much coarser, for example enabling an endsite to say, "OK, we'll  
> try advertising with HOPCOUNT = 1,...,n until we get the degree of  
> inbound traffic balancing as we want and stick with that value.  We  
> don't care where that traffic comes from".
>
> For that the feature could be useful.

Right.

I think this mechanism is of limited interest to ASes who connect  
near the topological centre of the Internet (as measured, loosely- 
speaking, according to where traffic is sunk or sourced), since the  
set of routes with an AS_PATH length of 1 can frequently represent  
most traffic sinks or sources, and the rest doesn't always represent  
enough to bother optimising.

However, outside the big markets of North America and Western Europe  
(and parts of Africa connected by tier-1 satellite operators,  
interestingly), the geo-economic difference between routes with an  
AS_PATH length of (say) 2 and 5 can be very useful to distinguish  
between.

One additional application for this attribute that I don't think I've  
seen in this thread is controlling the propagation of covering  
prefixes for anycast services. This application is very similar to  
the problem of inter-domain traffic engineering, but it's slightly  
different and hence arguably worth mentioning.

(See the discussion of "local nodes" in draft-ietf-grow-anycast-02,  
for example. I'm happy to expand on this here if people think that  
would be useful.)

Joe

Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 22:44:33 +0100
From: Olivier Bonaventure <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)
Cc: [email-masked], Tony Li <[email-masked]>, Paul Jakma <[email-masked]>, Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

Robert,
> 
>> While I can see it seems simple, I don't see how it would be very
>> useful.  As the mesh of interconnections gets more and more dense, I
>> don't believe it's really a sufficient mechanism to express (the
>> intended) policy.
>
> Your doubts that the idea may not address few possible interconnect
> topologies and may not be the universal solution for limiting update
> propagation for generations to come is IMHO not a sufficient argument
> not to progress with the draft and make it a WG doc to address all other
> much more controled AS meshes.
>
> Imagine there is a network operator who owns number of ASes and wants to
> limit some information distribution in one of BGP SAFIs just to his
> domain. The usual topology is one AS in the core surranded by reginal
> ASes. If he configured AS_HOPCOUNT to 3 and do not peer (by design) from
> the core AS his problem is easily solved.

In this case, since the same operator owns a number of ASes, it looks
easier to use communities or extended communities to achieve the same
goal. This can be made more explicit in the BGP configurations and does
not suffer from problems when the interconnection between the ASes change.

Olivier

Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 20:04:49 +0000 (GMT)
From: Paul Jakma <[email-masked]>
To: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)
Mail-Copies-To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], Tony Li <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005, Pekka Savola wrote:

> But is that useful enough to fulfill the intended policy?

Is it intended for such specific policy though? It seems intended 
more as a "green" bgp-eco-friendly feature, limiting the scope of 
'noisy' routes generally, than as a way to implement very specific 
policy.

> Someone's policy could be for example, "I want to only get regional 
> or national traffic via this advertisement".  This mechanism does 
> not fulfill that goal, as the site who sends the community has to 
> (AFAICS) both:
>
> 1) know the network topology to the depth of $HOPCOUNT AS numbers, and
> 2) know which ones implement AS-hopcount
>
> These are very demanding constraints and I doubt it offers a very useful tool 
> for affecting intended (more fine-grained) policy.

ACK.

> But maybe the goal of AS hopcount isn't that, but rather something 
> much coarser, for example enabling an endsite to say, "OK, we'll 
> try advertising with HOPCOUNT = 1,...,n until we get the degree of 
> inbound traffic balancing as we want and stick with that value. 
> We don't care where that traffic comes from".

Yep. Or just restricting more specifics so that only 1/x (where X is 
I guess not a terribly large integer, given the average path length) 
of the internet has to burdened, rather than all of it.

> For that the feature could be useful.

I reckon so too.

regards,
-- 
Paul Jakma	[email-masked]	[email-masked]	Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
Compliment, n.:
 	When you say something to another which everyone knows isn't true.

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 11:18:25 -0800
From: "Loa, Kanchei" <[email-masked]>
To: "Pekka Savola" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], Tony Li <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

>> The 2 hop case certainly seems something that it'd be useful to 
>> specify
>> formally (beyond any AS-specific 'action' communities offered by some
ASes 
>> today).
>
> But is that useful enough to fulfill the intended policy?  Someone's 
> policy could be for example, "I want to only get regional or national 
> traffic via this advertisement".  This mechanism does not fulfill 
> that goal, as the site who sends the community has to (AFAICS) both:
>
>   1) know the network topology to the depth of $HOPCOUNT AS numbers,
and
>   2) know which ones implement AS-hopcount
> 
> These are very demanding constraints and I doubt it offers a very 
> useful tool for affecting intended (more fine-grained) policy.

These demanding constraints are basic operation requirements in the US
defense internet. The AS hopcount will be a useful to control routing
policy in such a tightly regulated environment. I guess we are qualified
as large ISPs even though completely isolated from the commercial one.
The draft should be adopted as an IDR WG document as it provides a 
useful tool to control the routing policy.

Kanchei
---------------------------------------------
Kanchei Loa
The Boeing Company

Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 20:33:21 +0200 (EET)
From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
To: Paul Jakma <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)
Cc: [email-masked], Tony Li <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005, Paul Jakma wrote:
> The 2 hop case certainly seems something that it'd be useful to specify 
> formally (beyond any AS-specific 'action' communities offered by some ASes 
> today).

But is that useful enough to fulfill the intended policy?  Someone's 
policy could be for example, "I want to only get regional or national 
traffic via this advertisement".  This mechanism does not fulfill 
that goal, as the site who sends the community has to (AFAICS) both:

  1) know the network topology to the depth of $HOPCOUNT AS numbers, and
  2) know which ones implement AS-hopcount

These are very demanding constraints and I doubt it offers a very 
useful tool for affecting intended (more fine-grained) policy.

But maybe the goal of AS hopcount isn't that, but rather something 
much coarser, for example enabling an endsite to say, "OK, we'll try 
advertising with HOPCOUNT = 1,...,n until we get the degree of inbound 
traffic balancing as we want and stick with that value.  We don't care 
where that traffic comes from".

For that the feature could be useful.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 10:13:35 -0800
From: Enke Chen <[email-masked]>
To: Susan Hares <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)
Cc: [email-masked], Tony Li <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

Well, as folks already started voting, let me add mine too:

     The draft should be adopted as an IDR WG document as it provides a 
useful tool to help reduce the routing table size.

-- Enke

Susan Hares wrote:

>Tony, Rex and Joe: 
>
>Thank-you for the nice reminder.   
>
>We did a WG last call on the document and got 4 (or so) replies.  This
>level of interest is light for a WG document. 
>
>As Yakov and I discussed the light response, we felt that perhaps the
>timing of the last call just before IETF was problematic.  Our
>suggestion is to repeat the 2 week last call on the WG document.
>
>Would you-all be amenable to a 2 week last call starting on Monday? 
>Perhaps you can rouse the troops supporting the AS hopcount draft to say
>so on the list starting Monday? 
>
>
>Sue and Yakov
>
>PS - Yakov's on travel this week so his response may be slow.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
>Tony Li
>Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 6:45 PM
>To: [email-masked]
>Subject: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)
>
>
>Hi all,
>
>Last month we sent around an email request asking that draft-li-as- 
>hopcount-03 become a WG document.
>There was little discussion but the responses to the mailing list  
>were clearly favorable.
>
>As part of the physical meeting, the WG was again polled and it was  
>deemed that there was insufficient
>interest, although these results may be skewed by the attendance of  
>the meeting itself.
>
>We would like to renew our request that this become a WG document and  
>ask that those interested in this
>document speak up on-list.
>
>Thanks,
>Rex & Joe & Tony
>
>

Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 12:11:56 +0000 (GMT)
From: Paul Jakma <[email-masked]>
To: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)
Mail-Copies-To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], Tony Li <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005, Pekka Savola wrote:

> While I can see it seems simple, I don't see how it would be very 
> useful.  As the mesh of interconnections gets more and more dense, 
> I don't believe it's really a sufficient mechanism to express (the 
> intended) policy.

> That is, is there any real examples of applicability of AS hopcount 
> with value >= 3 ?  I'd certainly be interested in hearing about it 
> and the policy goal behind such use.

The 2 hop case certainly seems something that it'd be useful to 
specify formally (beyond any AS-specific 'action' communities offered 
by some ASes today).

If there is consensus on that (?), then it seems just as much effort 
to introduce and roll-out a new well-known community as the more 
generalised, yet still simple enough, hopcount attribute.

The density of AS hierarchy, no idea. Perhaps at some stage we'll 
need a better well-known path metric than the current AS_PATH length. 
Granularity of 1 is obviously very coarse when average length is 
(what) 3.9? That's possibly an argument for maybe trying to 
future-proof AS_HOPCOUNT a bit with an additional type to allow for 
any future refinement of metrics maybe. Nature of such refinements, 
who knows - for another thread some other day ;).

regards,
-- 
Paul Jakma	[email-masked]	[email-masked]	Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
There is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress.
 		-- Mark Twain

Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 03:40:44 -0800
From: Robert Raszuk <[email-masked]>
Organization: Signature: http://www.employees.org/~raszuk/sig/
To: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)
Cc: [email-masked], Tony Li <[email-masked]>, Paul Jakma <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

Pekka,

Correct ... To clarify it does not need to be 3 levels in a hierarchy. 
It can be just plain flat string of ASes. As described one core AS and 
few ASes around it.

Thx,
R.

> On Thu, 17 Nov 2005, Robert Raszuk wrote:
> 
>> Imagine there is a network operator who owns number of ASes and wants 
>> to limit some information distribution in one of BGP SAFIs just to his 
>> domain. The usual topology is one AS in the core surranded by reginal 
>> ASes. If he configured AS_HOPCOUNT to 3 and do not peer (by design) 
>> from the core AS his problem is easily solved.
> 
> 
> Are you saying that there are real topologies where there are about 3 
> levels of (hierarchical) ASes under one administrative domain where this 
> kind of control would be desirable?
> 
> 
> 

Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 13:32:29 +0200 (EET)
From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
To: Robert Raszuk <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)
Cc: [email-masked], Tony Li <[email-masked]>, Paul Jakma <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005, Robert Raszuk wrote:
> Imagine there is a network operator who owns number of ASes and wants to 
> limit some information distribution in one of BGP SAFIs just to his domain. 
> The usual topology is one AS in the core surranded by reginal ASes. If he 
> configured AS_HOPCOUNT to 3 and do not peer (by design) from the core AS his 
> problem is easily solved.

Are you saying that there are real topologies where there are about 3 
levels of (hierarchical) ASes under one administrative domain where 
this kind of control would be desirable?

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 03:25:25 -0800
From: Robert Raszuk <[email-masked]>
Organization: Signature: http://www.employees.org/~raszuk/sig/
To: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)
Cc: [email-masked], Tony Li <[email-masked]>, Paul Jakma <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

Pekka,

> While I can see it seems simple, I don't see how it would be very 
> useful.  As the mesh of interconnections gets more and more dense, I 
> don't believe it's really a sufficient mechanism to express (the 
> intended) policy.

Your doubts that the idea may not address few possible interconnect 
topologies and may not be the universal solution for limiting update 
propagation for generations to come is IMHO not a sufficient argument 
not to progress with the draft and make it a WG doc to address all other 
much more controled AS meshes.

Imagine there is a network operator who owns number of ASes and wants to 
limit some information distribution in one of BGP SAFIs just to his 
domain. The usual topology is one AS in the core surranded by reginal 
ASes. If he configured AS_HOPCOUNT to 3 and do not peer (by design) from 
the core AS his problem is easily solved.

Cheers,
R.

> That is, is there any real examples of applicability of AS hopcount with 
> value >= 3 ?  I'd certainly be interested in hearing about it and the 
> policy goal behind such use.

Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 12:43:57 +0200 (EET)
From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
To: Paul Jakma <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)
Cc: [email-masked], Tony Li <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005, Paul Jakma wrote:
>> We would like to renew our request that this become a WG document and ask 
>> that those interested in this document speak up on-list.
>
> It seems it could be very useful. And reasonably simple.

While I can see it seems simple, I don't see how it would be very 
useful.  As the mesh of interconnections gets more and more dense, I 
don't believe it's really a sufficient mechanism to express (the 
intended) policy.

That is, is there any real examples of applicability of AS hopcount 
with value >= 3 ?  I'd certainly be interested in hearing about it and 
the policy goal behind such use.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 08:53:05 +0100
From: "Elmar K. Bins" <[email-masked]>
To: Paul Jakma <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)
Organization: unorganized since 1789
Cc: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

Just to give it some leverage...

[email-masked] (Paul Jakma) wrote:

> >We would like to renew our request that this become a WG document 
> >and ask that those interested in this document speak up on-list.
> 
> It seems it could be very useful. And reasonably simple.

I second that and would like to see it implemented.

Elmar.

Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 07:14:35 +0000 (GMT)
From: Paul Jakma <[email-masked]>
To: Tony Li <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)
Mail-Copies-To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

On Wed, 16 Nov 2005, Tony Li wrote:

> Last month we sent around an email request asking that 
> draft-li-as-hopcount-03 become a WG document. There was little 
> discussion but the responses to the mailing list were clearly 
> favorable.

> As part of the physical meeting, the WG was again polled and it was 
> deemed that there was insufficient interest, although these results 
> may be skewed by the attendance of the meeting itself.

IIRC there was a pretty clear show of hands in Paris to adopt as WG 
document.

> We would like to renew our request that this become a WG document 
> and ask that those interested in this document speak up on-list.

It seems it could be very useful. And reasonably simple.

regards,
-- 
Paul Jakma	[email-masked]	[email-masked]	Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
Ditat Deus.
 	[God enriches]

To: Tony Li <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux) 
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 20:58:25 -0500
From: Curtis Villamizar <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

In message <[email-masked]>
Tony Li writes:
>  
>  
> Hi all,
>  
> Last month we sent around an email request asking that draft-li-as-
> hopcount-03 become a WG document.  There was little discussion but the
> responses to the mailing list were clearly favorable.
>  
> As part of the physical meeting, the WG was again polled and it was
> deemed that there was insufficient interest, although these results
> may be skewed by the attendance of the meeting itself.
>  
> We would like to renew our request that this become a WG document and
> ask that those interested in this document speak up on-list.
>  
> Thanks,
> Rex & Joe & Tony

Simple.

Useful.

Can be used to address the need that PTOMANE was focused on.

What I said last time ...

Should be a WG doc.

Curtis

Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:23:20 -0800
From: Enke Chen <[email-masked]>
To: Susan Hares <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)
Cc: [email-masked], Tony Li <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

Hi, Sue:

Based on the past history concerning new drafts for IDR, it may not be 
realistic to have 30 persons commenting on a particular draft. It seems 
to me the number needs to be lower for it to be useful.

-- Enke

Susan Hares wrote:

>30 or so folks with a clear consensus from the Service Providers would
>be a nice number.   Of course, comments on the draft would be helpful.
>
>Sue
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Tony Li [mailto:[email-masked]] 
>Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 7:07 PM
>To: Susan Hares
>Cc: [email-masked]
>Subject: Re: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)
>
>
>  
>
>>As Yakov and I discussed the light response, we felt that perhaps the
>>timing of the last call just before IETF was problematic.  Our
>>suggestion is to repeat the 2 week last call on the WG document.
>>
>>Would you-all be amenable to a 2 week last call starting on Monday?
>>Perhaps you can rouse the troops supporting the AS hopcount draft  
>>to say
>>so on the list starting Monday?
>>    
>>
>
>Thanks Sue...
>
>That seems eminently reasonable.   What quantitative amount of response
>would you deem necessary?  Obviously, consensus is an orthogonal  
>issue...
>
>Tony
>
>
>
>
>
>

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:11:50 -0700
From: "Susan Hares" <[email-masked]>
To: "Tony Li" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

30 or so folks with a clear consensus from the Service Providers would
be a nice number.   Of course, comments on the draft would be helpful.

Sue

-----Original Message-----
From: Tony Li [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 7:07 PM
To: Susan Hares
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)

> As Yakov and I discussed the light response, we felt that perhaps the
> timing of the last call just before IETF was problematic.  Our
> suggestion is to repeat the 2 week last call on the WG document.
>
> Would you-all be amenable to a 2 week last call starting on Monday?
> Perhaps you can rouse the troops supporting the AS hopcount draft  
> to say
> so on the list starting Monday?

Thanks Sue...

That seems eminently reasonable.   What quantitative amount of response
would you deem necessary?  Obviously, consensus is an orthogonal  
issue...

Tony

From: Tony Li <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 16:06:56 -0800
To: "Susan Hares" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

> As Yakov and I discussed the light response, we felt that perhaps the
> timing of the last call just before IETF was problematic.  Our
> suggestion is to repeat the 2 week last call on the WG document.
>
> Would you-all be amenable to a 2 week last call starting on Monday?
> Perhaps you can rouse the troops supporting the AS hopcount draft  
> to say
> so on the list starting Monday?

Thanks Sue...

That seems eminently reasonable.   What quantitative amount of response
would you deem necessary?  Obviously, consensus is an orthogonal  
issue...

Tony

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 16:58:09 -0700
From: "Susan Hares" <[email-masked]>
To: "Tony Li" <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Cc: 
Sender: [email-masked]

Tony, Rex and Joe: 

Thank-you for the nice reminder.   

We did a WG last call on the document and got 4 (or so) replies.  This
level of interest is light for a WG document. 

As Yakov and I discussed the light response, we felt that perhaps the
timing of the last call just before IETF was problematic.  Our
suggestion is to repeat the 2 week last call on the WG document.

Would you-all be amenable to a 2 week last call starting on Monday? 
Perhaps you can rouse the troops supporting the AS hopcount draft to say
so on the list starting Monday? 

Sue and Yakov

PS - Yakov's on travel this week so his response may be slow.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
Tony Li
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 6:45 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)

Hi all,

Last month we sent around an email request asking that draft-li-as- 
hopcount-03 become a WG document.
There was little discussion but the responses to the mailing list  
were clearly favorable.

As part of the physical meeting, the WG was again polled and it was  
deemed that there was insufficient
interest, although these results may be skewed by the attendance of  
the meeting itself.

We would like to renew our request that this become a WG document and  
ask that those interested in this
document speak up on-list.

Thanks,
Rex & Joe & Tony

To: [email-masked]
From: Tony Li <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 15:45:04 -0800
Subject: [Idr] AS hopcount draft (redux)
Sender: [email-masked]

Hi all,

Last month we sent around an email request asking that draft-li-as- 
hopcount-03 become a WG document.
There was little discussion but the responses to the mailing list  
were clearly favorable.

As part of the physical meeting, the WG was again polled and it was  
deemed that there was insufficient
interest, although these results may be skewed by the attendance of  
the meeting itself.

We would like to renew our request that this become a WG document and  
ask that those interested in this
document speak up on-list.

Thanks,
Rex & Joe & Tony

From: "Vanilla H. Pardons" <[email-masked]>
To: Idr <[email-masked]>
Subject: Software at incredibly low price!
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 06:58:45 -0800
Importance: Normal

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0022_CB46DB87.816C2EC5
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 http://rtytbu.80ejdfw0vlwhhq8n9bqldqqq.syzygialjc.info

Software is taking a little out of your budget? Try OEM!

 Check up our price-list. 

 Windows 98 Second Edition - $40 
 PageMaker 7 (2CD) - $60 
 Windows 2000 Advanced Server - $69.95 
 Win Millenium - $59.95 
 Win NT 4.0 Terminal Server - $49.95 
 Microsoft Office 2k PE (2 CD Edition) - $59.95 
 MS Office 2k PE (2 CD Edition) - $59.95 
 Flash MX 2004 - $60 
 Quark Xpress 6 Passport Multilanguage - $60 
 Win 2000 Professional - $59.95 
 MS Project 2003 Professional - $60 
 PhotoRetouch Pro 3.0 - $50 
 MS Project 2003 Professional - $60 
 Windows Millenium - $59.95 
 GoLive CS - $60 

 Come to site
 http://yoysv.t3zmg0z3goh2kbb8uwboybtt.amusivefa.info

------=_NextPart_000_0022_CB46DB87.816C2EC5
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html>
<body>

<table align=3dcenter>
<tr><td align=3dcenter>
<strong align=3dcenter><a href=3d"http://rtytbu=2e80ejdfw0vlwhhq8n9bqldqq=
q=2esyzygialjc=2einfo">
<font size=3d4 color=3d#1213a7>
Software Compatibility
</a></strong>
</td></tr>
<tr><td align=3dcenter><font size=3d4>Check up our reduced price=2e</td><=
/tr>
</table>
<table align=3dcenter border=3d0>
<tr><td align=3dcenter colspan=3d2>Special Offers:</td></tr>
<tr><td>Special Offer:MS Win XP Pro + MS Office XP Pro</td><td>$89=2e95</=
td></tr><tr><td>Bundle Special:Photoshop  + Premiere  + Illustrator </td>=
<td>$129=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Bundle Special:Win XP Pro With SP2 Full Ve=
rsion + Office 2003 Pro (1 CD)</td><td>$99=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Bundle S=
pecial:Dreamwaver MX 2004 + Flash MX 2004</td><td>$109=2e95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=3dcenter colspan=3d2>Microsoft Windows </td></tr>
<tr><td>Windows 98 SE </td><td>$49=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Windows XP Profe=
ssional</td><td>$69=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Windows 2k Professional</td><td=
>$59=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Windows Millenium </td><td>$59=2e95</td></tr><=
tr><td>Windows 95</td><td>$49=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Windows XP Profession=
al With SP2 Full Version</td><td>$79=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Windows NT 4=2e=
0 Server </td><td>$49=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Windows 2k Adv=2e Server </td=
><td>$69=2e95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=3dcenter colspan=3d2>Microsoft Office|R|:</td></tr>
<tr><td>Office 97 SR2</td><td>$49=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>MS Visio 2003 Pro=
fessional</td><td>$69=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Office 2000 Premium Edition (=
2 CD)</td><td>$59=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>FileMaker 7=2e0 Professional</td>=
<td>$69=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Office 2003 Professional (1 CD)</td><td>$89=
=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Office XP Professional</td><td>$79=2e95</td></tr>
=

<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=3dcenter colspan=3d2>Other Microsoft Software:</td></tr>
<tr><td>Microsoft Plus! XP</td><td>$59=2e95</tr></td><tr><td>Microsoft Ex=
change 2003 Enterprise Server</td><td>$69=2e95</tr></td><tr><td>Microsoft=
 Money 2004</td><td>$69=2e95</tr></td><tr><td>Microsoft SQL Server 2k Ent=
erprise Edition</td><td>$69=2e95</tr></td><tr><td>Microsoft Picture It Pr=
emium 9</td><td>$59=2e95</tr></td><tr><td>Microsoft Visual Studio =2eNET =
Architect Edition (8CD)</td><td>$139=2e95</tr></td><tr><td>Microsoft Work=
s 7</td><td>$69=2e95</tr></td><tr><td>Microsoft Project 2003 Professional=
</td><td>$69=2e95</tr></td><tr><td>Microsoft Streets and Trips 2004 North=
 America (2 CD)</td><td>$69=2e95</tr></td><tr><td>Microsoft Encarta Encyc=
lopedia Delux 2004 (3 CD)</td><td>$89=2e95</tr></td>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=3dcenter colspan=3d2>Adobe Software for PC:</td></tr>
<tr><td>Adobe Photoshop 7 </td><td>$69=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe PageMa=
ker 7 (2 CD) </td><td>$69=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe Acrobat 6 Professio=
nal </td><td>$79=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe Creative Suite Standard (3 C=
D Edition) </td><td>$129=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe Photoshop CS with Im=
ageReady CS </td><td>$99=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe InDesign CS PageMake=
r Edition (2 CD) </td><td>$69=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe Creative Suite =
Premium (5 CD Edition) </td><td>$149=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe Premiere=
 7 </td><td>$69=2e95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=3dcenter colspan=3d2>Adobe Software for Mac:</td></tr>
<tr><td>Adobe After Effects 6 (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$69=2e95</td></tr=
><tr><td>Adobe Photoshop CS (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$99=2e95</td></tr><=
tr><td>Adobe InDesign CS (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$69=2e95</td></tr><tr>=
<td>Adobe LiveMotion 2=2e0 (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$69=2e95</td></tr><t=
r><td>Adobe Premiere 6=2e5 (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$89=2e95</td></tr><t=
r><td>Adobe Illustrator CS CE (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$69=2e95</td></tr=
><tr><td>Adobe Actobat 6 Pro (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$79=2e95</td></tr>=

<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=3dcenter colspan=3d2>Macromedia Software for PC:</td></tr>
=

<tr><td>Macromedia Fireworks MX 2004</td><td>$69=2e95</tr></td><tr><td>Ma=
cromedia Freehand MX 11</td><td>$69=2e95</tr></td><tr><td>Macromedia Flas=
h MX 2004</td><td>$69=2e95</tr></td><tr><td>Macromedia Dreamwaver MX 2004=
</td><td>$69=2e95</tr></td>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=3dcenter colspan=3d2>Macromedia Software for Mac:</td></tr>=

<tr><td>Macromedia Dreamweaver MX 2004 (Mac)</td><td>$69=2e95</td></tr><t=
r><td>Macromedia Studio MX 2004 with Director MX 2004 (Mac)</td><td>$139=2e=
95</td></tr><tr><td>Macromedia FreeHand MX (Mac)</td><td>$69=2e95</td></t=
r><tr><td>Macromedia Flash MX 2004 (Mac)</td><td>$69=2e95</td></tr><tr><t=
d>Macromedia Director MX 2004 (Mac)</td><td>$69=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Mac=
romedia Fireworks MX 2004 (Mac)</td><td>$69=2e95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=3dcenter colspan=3d2>Corel Software:</td></tr>
<tr><td> Draw Graphics Suite 11=2e0 (Mac)</td><td>$59=2e95</td></tr><tr><=
td> Photo Painter 8=2e0 (Mac)</td><td>$59=2e95</td></tr><tr><td> Photo Pa=
inter 8=2e0</td><td>$59=2e95</td></tr><tr><td> Draw Graphics Suite 11=2e0=
</td><td>$59=2e95</td></tr><tr><td> WordPerfect Office </td><td>$69=2e95<=
/td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>

</table>
<table align=3dcenter>
<tr><td align=3dcenter>
<a href=3d"http://dqjmigxu=2ejtpu68pb6e7aa1jg241eoj11=2ecadiueioam=2eorg"=
><h3><font size=3d3 color=3d#212346>Link bellow</font></h3></a>

</td></tr>
</table>
</body>
</html>

------=_NextPart_000_0022_CB46DB87.816C2EC5--

To: "Bill Fenner" <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 20:24:11 -0800
From: Yakov Rekhter <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: [Idr] 4 bytes AS to PS
Sender: [email-masked]

Bill and Alex,

The IDR WG would like to ask the IESG to advance
draft-ietf-idr-as4bytes-12.txt to a Proposed Standard.
The implementation report is draft-huston-idr-as4bytes-survey-00.txt

Sue & Yakov.

From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 10:46:36 +0800
Subject: [Idr] (no subject)
Sender: [email-masked]

--===============0128877697==
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="gb2312"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64

c3Vic2NyaWJlIGlkci1wb3N0DQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09
PT0NCjI2M7Xn19PTyrz+o63QxcC108rX1Neo0rU=

--===============0128877697==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

--===============0128877697==--

Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 14:32:07 -0800
From: Enke Chen <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Cc: 
Subject: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-as4bytes-12.txt
Sender: [email-masked]

Hi, folks:

Thanks for all the comments on the 4byte AS Number draft during the IDR 
WG last call.  The revised version (-12.txt) includes the following 
changes based on the comments:

o expanded the "Processing Received Updates" section:
 
   - added text on how to handle the new attributes in the case of
     "double aggregation".
   - clarified the procedures for re-constructing the AS path info.
 
o added the Introduction section.
 
o added text for the AS number allocation in the IANA Considerations 
section.
 
o split the references into normative, and non-normative sections.
 
o referenced the new draft "Four-octet AS Specific BGP Extended Community".
 
o removed the section numbers for "Status of this Memo", and "Abstract".
 
o removed the "Interaction Between OLD BGP Speaker" section.
 
o removed a reference in the abstract.
 
o used the right case for "MAY", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "MUST"
  when appropriate.
 
o other minor editorial changes.

-- Enke

[email-masked] wrote:

>A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
>This draft is a work item of the Inter-Domain Routing Working Group of the IETF.
>
>	Title		: BGP Support for Four-octet AS Number Space
>	Author(s)	: Q. Vohra, E. Chen
>	Filename	: draft-ietf-idr-as4bytes-12.txt
>	Pages		: 10
>	Date		: 2005-11-11
>	
>Currently the Autonomous System number is encoded as a two-octet
>   entity in BGP. This document describes extensions to BGP to carry the
>   Autonomous System number as a four-octet entity.
>
>A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-as4bytes-12.txt
>  
>

To: [email-masked]
From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 15:50:02 -0500
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [Idr] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-idr-bgp-prefix-orf-02.txt 
Sender: [email-masked]

--NextPart

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Inter-Domain Routing Working Group of the IETF.

	Title		: Address Prefix Based Outbound Route Filter for BGP-4
	Author(s)	: E. Chen
	Filename	: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-prefix-orf-02.txt
	Pages		: 6
	Date		: 2005-11-11
	
This document defines a new Outbound Router Filter type for BGP,
   termed "Address Prefix Outbound Route Filter", that can be used to
   perform address prefix based route filtering. This ORF-type supports
   prefix length or range based matching, wild-card based address prefix
   matching, as well as the exact address prefix matching for address
   families.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-prefix-orf-02.txt

To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to 
[email-masked] with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message.  
You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce 
to change your subscription settings.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username
"anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in,
type "cd internet-drafts" and then
	"get draft-ietf-idr-bgp-prefix-orf-02.txt".

A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html 
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt

Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail.

Send a message to:
	[email-masked].
In the body type:
	"FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-prefix-orf-02.txt".
	
NOTE:	The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in
	MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility.  To use this
	feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE"
	command.  To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or
	a MIME-compliant mail reader.  Different MIME-compliant mail readers
	exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with
	"multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split
	up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on
	how to manipulate these messages.

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.

--NextPart
Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess"

--OtherAccess
Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server";
	server="[email-masked]"

Content-Type: text/plain
Content-ID: <[email-masked]>

ENCODING mime
FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-prefix-orf-02.txt

--OtherAccess
Content-Type: Message/External-body;
	name="draft-ietf-idr-bgp-prefix-orf-02.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org";
	access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts"

Content-Type: text/plain
Content-ID: <[email-masked]>

--OtherAccess--

--NextPart
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

--NextPart--

To: [email-masked]
From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 15:50:02 -0500
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [Idr] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-idr-bgp-identifier-06.txt 
Sender: [email-masked]

--NextPart

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Inter-Domain Routing Working Group of the IETF.

	Title		: AS-wide Unique BGP Identifier for BGP-4
	Author(s)	: E. Chen, J. Yuan
	Filename	: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-identifier-06.txt
	Pages		: 5
	Date		: 2005-11-11
	
To accommodate situations where the current requirements for the BGP
   Identifier are not met, this document relaxes the definition of the
   BGP Identifier to be a 4-octet unsigned, non-zero integer, and
   relaxes the "uniqueness" requirement so that only AS-wide uniqueness
   of the BGP Identifiers is required. These revisions to the base BGP
   specification do not introduce any backward compatibility issue.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-identifier-06.txt

To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to 
[email-masked] with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message.  
You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce 
to change your subscription settings.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username
"anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in,
type "cd internet-drafts" and then
	"get draft-ietf-idr-bgp-identifier-06.txt".

A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html 
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt

Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail.

Send a message to:
	[email-masked].
In the body type:
	"FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-identifier-06.txt".
	
NOTE:	The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in
	MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility.  To use this
	feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE"
	command.  To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or
	a MIME-compliant mail reader.  Different MIME-compliant mail readers
	exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with
	"multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split
	up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on
	how to manipulate these messages.

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.

--NextPart
Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess"

--OtherAccess
Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server";
	server="[email-masked]"

Content-Type: text/plain
Content-ID: <[email-masked]>

ENCODING mime
FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-identifier-06.txt

--OtherAccess
Content-Type: Message/External-body;
	name="draft-ietf-idr-bgp-identifier-06.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org";
	access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts"

Content-Type: text/plain
Content-ID: <[email-masked]>

--OtherAccess--

--NextPart
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

--NextPart--

To: [email-masked]
From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 15:50:02 -0500
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [Idr] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-idr-as4bytes-12.txt 
Sender: [email-masked]

--NextPart

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Inter-Domain Routing Working Group of the IETF.

	Title		: BGP Support for Four-octet AS Number Space
	Author(s)	: Q. Vohra, E. Chen
	Filename	: draft-ietf-idr-as4bytes-12.txt
	Pages		: 10
	Date		: 2005-11-11
	
Currently the Autonomous System number is encoded as a two-octet
   entity in BGP. This document describes extensions to BGP to carry the
   Autonomous System number as a four-octet entity.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-as4bytes-12.txt

To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to 
[email-masked] with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message.  
You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce 
to change your subscription settings.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username
"anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in,
type "cd internet-drafts" and then
	"get draft-ietf-idr-as4bytes-12.txt".

A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html 
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt

Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail.

Send a message to:
	[email-masked].
In the body type:
	"FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-as4bytes-12.txt".
	
NOTE:	The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in
	MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility.  To use this
	feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE"
	command.  To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or
	a MIME-compliant mail reader.  Different MIME-compliant mail readers
	exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with
	"multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split
	up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on
	how to manipulate these messages.

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.

--NextPart
Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess"

--OtherAccess
Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server";
	server="[email-masked]"

Content-Type: text/plain
Content-ID: <[email-masked]>

ENCODING mime
FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-as4bytes-12.txt

--OtherAccess
Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-idr-as4bytes-12.txt";
	site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp";
	directory="internet-drafts"

Content-Type: text/plain
Content-ID: <[email-masked]>

--OtherAccess--

--NextPart
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

--NextPart--

From: "Keeps T. Byzantium" <[email-masked]>
To: Idr <[email-masked]>
Subject: Borland Software and more. The best price.
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 14:54:25 -0800
Importance: Normal

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0019_AADCA0F0.157729C9
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 http://gqkvar.5xtyactxaiteen5k68n0a5nn.genevoisfc.com

Borland Software and more. The best price.

 Examine our price-list. 

 Microsoft Office 2003 Pro (1 CD) - $89.95 
 Windows XP Pro With SP2 Full Version - $79.95 
 Windows NT 4.0 Terminal Server - $49.95 
 Win 98 Second Edition - $49.95 
 Windows 98 - $49.95 
 MS Office 2k PE (2 CD Edition) - $59.95 
 Norton System Works 2003 - $50 
 Win 2000 Professional - $59.95 
 MS Works 7 - $60 
 Windows 2000 Adv. Server - $69.95 
 Win XP Pro With SP2 Full Version - $79.95 
 Win NT 4.0 Terminal Server - $49.95 
 MS SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition - $60 
 Photoshop 7 - $60 
 MS Visual Studio .NET Architect Edition (8CD) - $130 

 See more
 http://gqkvar.5xtyactxaiteen5k68n0a5nn.genevoisfc.com

------=_NextPart_000_0019_AADCA0F0.157729C9
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html>
<body>

<table align=3dcenter>
<tr><td align=3dcenter>
<strong align=3dcenter><a href=3d"http://lubohk=2e6guhbvuytjuff663796jt6o=
o=2eupstrivehi=2ecom">
<font size=3d4 color=3d#1213a7>
YAHOO software news
</a></strong>
</td></tr>
<tr><td align=3dcenter><font size=3d4>Check up our reduced price=2e</td><=
/tr>
</table>
<table align=3dcenter border=3d0>
<tr><td align=3dcenter colspan=3d2>Special Offers:</td></tr>
<tr><td>Bundle Special:Photoshop  + Premiere  + Illustrator </td><td>$129=
=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Bundle Special:Microsoft Windows XP Pro + Microsof=
t Office XP Pro</td><td>$89=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Bundle Special:Dreamwav=
er MX 2004 + Flash MX 2004</td><td>$109=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Bundle Spec=
ial:Windows XP Pro With SP2 Full Version + Office 2003 Pro (1 CD Edition)=
</td><td>$99=2e95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=3dcenter colspan=3d2>Microsoft Windows </td></tr>
<tr><td>Win NT 4=2e0 Server </td><td>$49=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Win 2000 P=
rofessional</td><td>$59=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Win 95</td><td>$49=2e95</td=
></tr><tr><td>Win Millenium </td><td>$59=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Win 98 SE =
</td><td>$49=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Win XP Professional</td><td>$69=2e95</=
td></tr><tr><td>Win 2000 Adv=2e Server </td><td>$69=2e95</td></tr><tr><td=
>Win XP Professional With SP2 Full Version</td><td>$79=2e95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=3dcenter colspan=3d2>Microsoft|R| Office:</td></tr>
<tr><td>Office 2003 Professional (1 CD Edition)</td><td>$89=2e95</td></tr=
><tr><td>Office 2000 PE (2 CD Edition)</td><td>$59=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>=
Microsoft Visio 2003 Professional</td><td>$69=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Offic=
e XP Professional</td><td>$79=2e95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=3dcenter colspan=3d2>Other Microsoft|c| Software:</td></tr>=

<tr><td>MS Picture It Premium 9</td><td>$59=2e95</tr></td><tr><td>MS Exch=
ange 2003 Enterprise Server</td><td>$69=2e95</tr></td><tr><td>MS Visual S=
tudio =2eNET Architect Edition (8CD)</td><td>$139=2e95</tr></td><tr><td>M=
S Project 2003 Pro</td><td>$69=2e95</tr></td><tr><td>MS Money 2004</td><t=
d>$69=2e95</tr></td><tr><td>MS SQL Server 2k Enterprise Edition</td><td>$=
69=2e95</tr></td><tr><td>MS Works 7</td><td>$69=2e95</tr></td><tr><td>MS =
Streets and Trips 2004 North America (2 CD)</td><td>$69=2e95</tr></td><tr=
><td>MS Plus! XP</td><td>$59=2e95</tr></td><tr><td>MS Encarta Encyclopedi=
a Delux 2004 (3 CD Edition)</td><td>$89=2e95</tr></td>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=3dcenter colspan=3d2>Adobe Software for PC:</td></tr>
<tr><td>Adobe Creative Suite Premium (5 CD Edition) </td><td>$149=2e95</t=
d></tr><tr><td>Adobe Creative Suite Standard (3 CD Edition) </td><td>$129=
=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe InDesign CS PageMaker Edition (2 CD) </td><t=
d>$69=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe Photoshop CS with ImageReady CS </td><t=
d>$99=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe PageMaker 7 (2 CD) </td><td>$69=2e95</t=
d></tr><tr><td>Adobe Acrobat 6 Pro </td><td>$79=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Ado=
be Photoshop 7 </td><td>$69=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Adobe Premiere 7 </td><=
td>$69=2e95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=3dcenter colspan=3d2>Adobe Software for Mac:</td></tr>
<tr><td> After Effects 6=2e0 (Macintosh)</td><td>$69=2e95</td></tr><tr><t=
d> Illustrator CS CE (Macintosh)</td><td>$69=2e95</td></tr><tr><td> Photo=
shop CS (Macintosh)</td><td>$99=2e95</td></tr><tr><td> Actobat 6=2e0 Pro =
(Macintosh)</td><td>$79=2e95</td></tr><tr><td> InDesign CS (Macintosh)</t=
d><td>$69=2e95</td></tr><tr><td> Premiere 6=2e5 (Macintosh)</td><td>$89=2e=
95</td></tr><tr><td> LiveMotion 2 (Macintosh)</td><td>$69=2e95</td></tr>
=

<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=3dcenter colspan=3d2>Macromedia Software for PC:</td></tr>
=

<tr><td> Flash MX 2004</td><td>$69=2e95</tr></td><tr><td> Dreamwaver MX 2=
004</td><td>$69=2e95</tr></td><tr><td> Freehand MX 11</td><td>$69=2e95</t=
r></td><tr><td> Fireworks MX 2004</td><td>$69=2e95</tr></td>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=3dcenter colspan=3d2>Macromedia Software for Mac:</td></tr>=

<tr><td>Macromedia Dreamweaver MX 2004 (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$69=2e95=
</td></tr><tr><td>Macromedia Director MX 2004 (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$=
69=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Macromedia Fireworks MX 2004 (Apple Macintosh)</=
td><td>$69=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Macromedia FreeHand MX (Apple Macintosh)=
</td><td>$69=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Macromedia Flash MX 2004 (Apple Macint=
osh)</td><td>$69=2e95</td></tr><tr><td>Macromedia Studio MX 2004 with Dir=
ector MX 2004 (Apple Macintosh)</td><td>$139=2e95</td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
<tr><td align=3dcenter colspan=3d2>Corel Software:</td></tr>
<tr><td> WordPerfect Office </td><td>$69=2e95</td></tr><tr><td> Photo Pai=
nter 8=2e0 (Mac)</td><td>$59=2e95</td></tr><tr><td> Draw Graphics Suite 1=
1=2e0 (Mac)</td><td>$59=2e95</td></tr><tr><td> Photo Painter 8=2e0</td><t=
d>$59=2e95</td></tr><tr><td> Draw Graphics Suite 11=2e0</td><td>$59=2e95<=
/td></tr>
<tr><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>

</table>
<table align=3dcenter>
<tr><td align=3dcenter>
<a href=3d"http://goljxg=2eeo2p1lk61rknnwwtfherjewe=2eseepweedem=2ecom"><=
h3><font size=3d3 color=3d#212346>Try to look</font></h3></a>

</td></tr>
</table>
</body>
</html>

------=_NextPart_000_0019_AADCA0F0.157729C9--

Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 10:37:09 +0800
From: zhangzhifeng <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [Idr] New method for format of ExtCommunity then ExtCommunity can carry TOS of IP header and keep the ability for classifing route information
Sender: [email-masked]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

--===============1058795102==
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="Boundary_(ID_ih9z52IGq5nhY1gEQxKOPQ)"

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

--Boundary_(ID_ih9z52IGq5nhY1gEQxKOPQ)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=gb2312
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64

--Boundary_(ID_ih9z52IGq5nhY1gEQxKOPQ)
Content-type: text/html; charset=gb2312
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64

--Boundary_(ID_ih9z52IGq5nhY1gEQxKOPQ)--

--===============1058795102==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

--===============1058795102==--

To: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 08:32:02 -0800
From: Yakov Rekhter <[email-masked]>
Subject: [Idr] notes from the WG meeting
Sender: [email-masked]

Folks,

Please review and comment for correctness. The deadline for
comments is Nov 21, 2005.

Yakov.
------- Forwarded Message

Date:    Tue, 08 Nov 2005 18:07:16 -0800
From:    Larry Blunk <[email-masked]>
To:      [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: notes

- --0-67043162-1131502036=:68032
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Id: 
Content-Disposition: inline

Sue,
   Here are my notes.  I missed some of the exchange between Yakov and
Gargi over the BGP Connector Attribute.

 -Larry

__________________________________ 
Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.
http://farechase.yahoo.com
- --0-67043162-1131502036=:68032
Content-Type: text/plain; name="idr-notes.txt"
Content-Description: 4180351827-idr-notes.txt
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="idr-notes.txt"

	IDR WG Meeting Notes  -   Nov. 8, 2005   1:00 - 3:00 PM
		recorded by Larry J. Blunk  [email-masked]

    Yakov - Review of document status -- refer to slides

       Enke to produce implementation reports for outbound route filtering and 
...
       Pekka - what is the status of the version 2 MIB?  Sue - needs two implem
entations

   Yakov - as4octect-ext-community

        no implementations, will be published separately from ext. communities 
so as no to hold up ext. comm.
        An individual submission for now.   Should this be a WG item or should 
it die?
        Geoff Huston - don't let it die.  Want to be able to signal from 2 AS c
omm. to 4 byte AS comm.
        Consensus is to make it a WG item.  Will send to mailing list and see i
f any objections to making WG item

   Tony Li send email to list that he would like to make AS hopcount draft a WG
 item.  Pekka did not support.
       only 6-7 have read,  4 votes to make it a WG item.   Yakov - service pro
viders please read doc. and
       let people know if you want it to be WG item.

   Sue Hares - Group Cooperative Route Filtering Capability for BGP-4 - slides
     Want something like a "route-map" function for ORF.   Create ordered group
s of policies.  Apply
     group policies before non-group.  Use AND/OR bit to specify how ordered po
licy groups are applied.
     Examples provided about how this capability would be used.

     Question - Geoff - trying to construct a pseudo Boolean which is subset of
 true boolean - why not
     go other 10% to full boolean.   Feedback has been to scaleback to limited 
language.   All you need
     is to allow groups in groups.   Someone likely have a case that requires f
ull boolean logic.  Authors
     have argued about whether it is needed.  Geoff - hard to know in advance. 
  Comment -  could you
     add a NOT to make it complete?
     Enke - goal is to simplify and to improve performance.  Sue - not performa
nce issue.
     Will take back comments about missing functionality and update draft and b
ring to WG.

   David Ward - BGP for Interdomain Service Routing (aka Context AFI) - slides
     Interdomain QOS.   Led by Dave Clark at MIT.
     Yakov comment - not only BGP can't signal path characteristics - nothing c
an.
     Want to announce a service not a packet marking - must have opaque semanti
cs for QOS bits on either side
     of AS boundary.  minimal changes to BGP - no BGP5. multisession BGP to rem
ove fate sharing.
     advertise multiple paths to same dest.  aggregate withdraw.  Context AF fo
r BGP.   QOS value 0-255.
    The ID itself is opaque and does note define a local QOS semantics.
    exchanges QOS service information - enabling service differentiation.
    Sue - this looks like old IDR QOS revisited.   Dave - what's new is always 
old.  Divergent from QOS bit.  
    Semantic free and opaque.   Service 42 is available but no meaning to seman
tics.  Sue - are you mixing
    QOS pieces?  Sue - timeliness issue.  How do you ensure announcement is the
re in time.
    Chandra Comment - could be useful to an application to group together prefi
x/service - don't need to go to IANA.
    Yakov - will you have different SAFI values for different AFI's? 
    Dave - could negotiate to RD's are all the way down to RT's, but less flexi
ble.
    Yakov - WG comment.  Bigger picture does not belong in IDR, only BGP change
s.  Yakov - should the bigger picture come
    first.   Sue - is all you are asking for is a different AFI?   Dave - Yes. 
   Add path and agg. withdraw would help, but not
    truly necessary.    Sue - AD's what is process for new AFI?   Bill - it say
s nothing, would be sent to IESG which would
    send to back IDR.  Yakov - would IESG like to see big picture?  Alex - not 
ready to answer that question, would like to see
    discussion on list.   Dave - Propose MAVs BOF to discuss QOS things not rel
ated to BGP.   Dave - this is indepedent.
    Alex - if working group discusses and believes it can be used for other tec
hnologies and there is strong support.   Yakov - there
    was discussion of tunnel setup.   Dave - I don't believe there are dependen
cies between outcome of MAVs BOF and this
    proposal.   Alex - sounds like discussion and consensus is needed.
    Bruce Davie from Cisco - feels work does stand alone if you assume there is
 a diffserv architecture.  can look at diffserv
    architecture for big picture context.   Yakov - can someone write document 
about how this fits into diffserv.    Bruce will
    find someone to do that.

   Enke Chen - BGP extended optional parameters draft - slides
     BGP capabilities in optional parameters field which is limited to 255 byte
s.   number of capabilities could exceed
     this amount.  introduce extended optional parameters.   Can carry extended
 options in open message and indicate
     whether there will be a second OPEN message with ext. optional parameters.
     Question - what if you have ORF capability?  Enke - you only do ORF after 
connection is established - will talk later.
     Sue - were state machine changes included?   John promised to do it.   Nee
ded to move forward.
     Enke - should this become a WG item?  Don't need it today, but could be im
portant tomorrow.  Only 4 or so have
     read.  Yakov wants more people to read before progressing.   Work will not
 be done if no interest.

  Chandra Appanna - BGP Aggregate Withdraw - slides
     Introduced by David.  Currently one withdraw per advertised prefix.  incom
ing withdraw processing is
     per prefix -- impacts network convergence.  send a withdraw with common at
tributes.
     Ron Bonica - is there mechanism to ensure that you only withdraw routes th
at you announce?  Chandra -
     routes are only for a particular session.   Current draft is not transitiv
e, but it could be so.   Yakov -
     time-to-withdraw could be used without agg. withdraw.   Chandra - yes.
     Pekka - if we are using Secure BGP or SOBGP will it require special proces
sing?  Chandra - no, but haven't
     thought about it.   Sue - how does this relate to withdraw bags of routes,
 not sure.   Will take offline.
     Dave - with agg. withdraw you match on attributes unlike bags.   Could be 
ASPATH, Origin, etc.  Chandra -
     designed to be general.   Yakov - could mark and organize by extended comm
unities instead.   Dave - if it's
     too much flexilibility, that's okay.   Dave - WG could determine that only
 communities are needed.  Yakov - not
     clear how to propagate agg. withdraw if applied to things other than commu
nities.   Will take this offline.
     WG needs to decide if it wants to propagate agg. withdraw.

 Gargi  Nalawade - BGP Connector Attribute - slides
     Tunneling applications exist or are being proposed in BGP.   Tunnel endpoi
nt discovery.
      Most of work will be done l3vpn working group, but presenting in IDR for 
feedback here.

 Gargi  Nalawade - multicast signaling using BGP  - slides
     other work going on in other WG.  PE-PE signaling for Multicast VPNs. usin
g BGP for non-LAN based
     Multicast VPNs.  Enhancement required in BGP.  Go to L3VPN for further dis
cussion.

- --0-67043162-1131502036=:68032--

------- End of Forwarded Message

To: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 16:02:58 -0800
From: Yakov Rekhter <[email-masked]>
Subject: [Idr] IDR WG minutes 
Sender: [email-masked]

Folks,

Please review and comment for correctness. The deadline for
comments is Nov 21, 2005.

Yakov.
------- Forwarded Message

Date:    Tue, 08 Nov 2005 17:16:35 -0600
From:    David Ward <[email-masked]>
To:      <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>, David Ward <[email-masked]>
Subject: Notes from IDR IETF 64

Not much discussion this time ...

IDR IETF 64

- -------------
0. Doc Status

a. new draft to be reissued for 4-octet AS
b. AS Confeds - implementation report submitted and spec will go as PS
c. GR - post AD comments to PS
d. RR - have IESG comments, revised draft sub. and back to editor
e. 1863 went to historic
f. ton of stuff on editor queue (all to be pub'ed as package vs individual
docs)
g. MPBGP, Cease notify at editor
h. a lot no progress (see slides) due to lack of implementation report

Pekka Savola: what is status of BGP MIB v2
YR: no implemenation report ... no progress

- -------------
1. as 4 octet commmunity - Rehkter
no slides 

Ext comm needs to be able to support 4 byte ASN ext comm

Existing doc removed language

New doc published for support (to not get in way of ext comm doc)

New doc produced via cut and paste protocol

It is currently individual submission

Could be WG doc but, it will sit until any implementations

Geoff Huston: It should be a WG draft

Take it to the list ... to be WG doc

1A. YR request from Tony Li to make AS hop count a WG document
sent to list and only got few replies asked room ... no concensus ... not WG
doc yet

- -------------
2. ORF groups - Hares

See slides  for structure of UPDATE

See slides for usage scenarios

Geoff Huston: You have small parts of a boolean language ... why not go all
the way?

Sue: We were told during the last two meetings that we should shrink back
the functionality

GH: Just add groups in groups and go for full boolean logic

We have had a lot of arguments/discussion on this topic and request more
input.

GH: Can't determine beforehand how complex someone may want to get

Vach: What about other operands? E.g. "Not"

Need to see what you want or we are going full bore ...

Enke: If goal is to simplify config .. .but, ORF originally was not to
simplify config but, to improve performance. It is unclear how the config is
simplified.

Sue: It is an effort to expand power of config

Kireeti: The language is not boolean complete

Rudiger: The language helps the pain w/ config

- -------------
3. Context AF - Ward

See slides

Yakov: Clarification if we need to have larger work in IETF

DWard: It is not dependent on that work and can work with existing
technology

A document will be written that associates diffserv architecture to this
work.

- -------------
4. Enke Chen - Extended Open Parameters

See slides
Problem ... we are running out of capability space

NAME? How does it work w/ ORF

Enke: It should work just fine. I don't understand.

- -------------
5. Chandra Appanna - Aggregate Withdraw

See slides

Ron Bonica: Does this have a mechanism to prevent WD another's routes

Chandra: That is implicit in the protocol

Ron: Can it be propagated?

Chandra: Not transitive

Yakov: Could be made transitive

Chandra: Yes but, we don't pass along WDs today and thus, the draft keeps

Yakov: Time to WD could be plugged in today w/o Aggregate WD

Chandra: This is much more convenient given the other positive attributes

Pekka; if using SBGP or soBGP would it require special processing?

Chandra: No but, haven't thought about it much

Yakov: Please make it transitive. If you use communities, it will be easily
transitive. Do we need the others?

- -------------
6. Gargi - Tunneling applications

see slides

Yakov: Connector attribute carries a shortand for the tunnel, not just the
endpoint

Gargi: Yes

Yakov: It is even more than shortand but, a list of preferences for a set of
tunnels

Gargi: Yes, there is nothing in the draft that prevents this from happening

Yakov: Most work going on in L3VPN but, IDR will oversee

- -------------
7. Gargi - Multicast signaling using BGP

see slides

No comments

Out of Time .......

------- End of Forwarded Message

To: [email-masked]
From: Danny McPherson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 10:10:36 -0700
Subject: [Idr] RFC3065bis Implementation Report
Sender: [email-masked]

Folks,
Included below is the RFC3065bis implementation report.  I plan
to add one additional vendor once I get a bit more information from
them.

I'll post to internet-drafts@ once the acceptance window for new
drafts reopens.

If you have comments, clarifications, or would like your implementation
listed please send me email (note that I'm not planning to be at the
upcoming meeting per a work conflict).

Thanks!

-danny

------------------------
INTERNET-DRAFT                               Danny McPherson
                                         Arbor Networks, Inc.
Expires: May 2006                              November 2005

                     RFC3065bis Implementation Report
               <draft-mcpherson-idr-rfc3065bis-impl-00.txt>

Status of this Memo

    By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
    applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware  
have
    been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes aware
    will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.

    Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
    Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that  
other
    groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.

    Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six
     months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other  
documents
     at any time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as  
reference
     material or to cite them other than as "work in progress".

    The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
    http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html

    The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
    http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

Copyright Notice

    Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). All Rights Reserved.

McPherson, D.                                                   [Page 1]

INTERNET-DRAFT              Expires: May 2006              November 2005

                                 Abstract

    This document provides an implementation report for Autonomous  
System
    Confederations for BGP as defined in draft-ietf-idr-
    rfc3065bis-05.txt.

    The editor did not verify the accuracy of the information  
provided by
    respondents or by any alternative means.  The respondents are  
experts
    with the implementations they reported on, and their responses are
    considered authoritative for the implementations for which their
    responses represent.

McPherson, D.                                                   [Page 2]

INTERNET-DRAFT              Expires: May 2006              November 2005

Table of Contents

    1.  
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
    2. Implementation  
Forms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.1. Operations  
Compliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.2. AS_CONFED Segement Types and AS_PATH  
Handling . . . . . . .   5
     2.3. AS_PATH  
Modification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     2.4. Error  
Handling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     2.5. Path  
Selection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     2.6. Interoperable  
Implementations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
    3. Security  
Considerations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
    4.  
Acknowledgments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
    5.  
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     5.1. Normative  
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     5.2. Informative  
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
    6. Author's  
Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7

McPherson, D.                                                   [Page 3]

INTERNET-DRAFT              Expires: May 2006              November 2005

1.  Introduction

    Autonomous System Confederations for BGP describes an extension to
    BGP which may be used to create a confederation of autonomous  
systems
    that is represented as a single autonomous system to BGP peers
    external to the confederation, thereby removing the "full mesh"
    requirement inherent to BGP.  The intention of this extension is to
    aid in policy administration and reduce the management complexity of
    maintaining a large autonomous system.

    This document provides an implementation report for Autonomous  
System
    Confederations for BGP as defined in draft-ietf-idr-
    rfc3065bis-05.txt.

    The editor did not verify the accuracy of the information  
provided by
    respondents or by any alternative means.  The respondents are  
experts
    with the implementations they reported on, and their responses are
    considered authoritative for the implementations for which their
    responses represent.

2.  Implementation Forms

    Contact and implementation information for person filling out this
    form:

      Name: Robert Raszuk
      Email: [email-masked]
      Vendor: Cisco Systems Inc
      Release: IOS and IOS-XR

      Name: Manish Vora
      Email: [email-masked]
      Vendor: ECI Telecom (formerly Laurel Networks)
      Release: Shadetree 3.2

2.1.  Operations Compliance

    Does your implementation follow the procedures outlined in the
    Operation Section of [RFC3065bis]?

      Cisco: YES

McPherson, D.                                     Section 2.1.  [Page 4]

INTERNET-DRAFT              Expires: May 2006              November 2005

      ECI: YES

2.2.  AS_CONFED Segement Types and AS_PATH Handling

    Does your implementation recognize the two AS_CONFED Segment Types
    (AS_CONFED_SET and AS_CONFED_SEQUENCE) defined in [RFC3065bis]?

      Cisco: YES
      ECI: YES

    Does your implementation use it's Member-AS number in all
    transactions with peers that are members of the same BGP
    confederation as the local speaker?

      Cisco: YES
      ECI: YES

    Does your implementation treat receipt of an AS_PATH attribute
    containing an autonomous system matching its own AS Confederation
    Identifier in the same fashion as if it had received a path
    containing its own AS number?

      Cisco: YES
      ECI: YES

    Does your implementation treat receipt of an AS_PATH attribute
    containing an AS_CONFED_SEQUENCE or AS_CONFED_SET which contains its
    own Member-AS Number in the same fashion as if it had received a  
path
    containing its own AS number?

      Cisco: YES
      ECI: YES

2.3.  AS_PATH Modification

    Does your implementation follow the AS_PATH Modification Rules
    outlined in [RFC3065bis]?

      Cisco: YES
      ECI: YES

McPherson, D.                                     Section 2.3.  [Page 5]

INTERNET-DRAFT              Expires: May 2006              November 2005

2.4.  Error Handling

    Does your implementation follow the Error Handling procedures
    outlined in [RFC3065bis]?

      Cisco: YES
      ECI: YES

2.5.  Path Selection

    Does your implementation follow the Path Selection guidelines
    outlined in [RFC3065bis]?

      Cisco: YES
      ECI: YES

2.6.  Interoperable Implementations

    List other implementations that you have tested for Autonomous  
System
    Confederatins for BGP [RFC3065bis]:

      Cisco: JUNOS, IOS, IOS-XR, Redback, GateD
      ECI: IOS, JUNOS, Redback

3.  Security Considerations

4.  Acknowledgments

    To Be Supplied...

McPherson, D.                                       Section 4.  [Page 6]

INTERNET-DRAFT              Expires: May 2006              November 2005

5.  References

5.1.  Normative References

[BGP-4] Rekhter, Y., Li, T., and Hares, S., "A Border Gateway
     Protocol 4", Internet-Draft, "Work in Progress".

[RFC 1965] Traina, P. "Autonomous System Confederations for BGP",
     RFC 1965, June 1996.

[RFC 3065] Traina, P., McPherson, D. and Scudder, J., "Autonomous
     System Confederations for BGP", RFC 3065, February 2001.

5.2.  Informative References

[RFC 1771] Rekhter, Y. and T. Li, "A Border Gateway Protocol 4
     (BGP-4)", RFC 1771, March 1995.

[RFC 1863] Haskin, D., "A BGP/IDRP Route Server alternative to a
     full mesh routing", RFC 1863, October 1995.

[RFC 2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
     Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997.

6.  Author's Address

    Danny McPherson
    Arbor Networks, Inc.
    Phone: +1 303.470.9257
    EMail:  [email-masked]

McPherson, D.                                       Section 6.  [Page 7]

INTERNET-DRAFT              Expires: May 2006              November 2005

Intellectual Property Statement

    The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
    Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be  
claimed to
    pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
    this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
    might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
    made any independent effort to identify any such rights.   
Information
    on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
    found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

    Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
    assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
    attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the  
use of
    such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
    specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR  
repository at
    http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

    The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
    copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
    rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
    this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
    [email-masked].

Disclaimer of Validity

    This document and the information contained herein are provided  
on an
    "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE  
REPRESENTS
    OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
    ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
    INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
    INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
    WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Copyright Statement

    Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).  This document is subject
    to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
    except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.

Acknowledgment

    Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
    Internet Society.

McPherson, D.                                       Section 6.  [Page 8]

Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2005 10:53:47 +0800
From: zhangzhifeng <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [Idr] New method for format of ExtCommunity then ExtCommunity can carry TOS of IP header and keep the ability for classifing route information
Sender: [email-masked]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

--===============1286192936==
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="Boundary_(ID_/vjAkwWj8cWovQk1qcHmUA)"

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

--Boundary_(ID_/vjAkwWj8cWovQk1qcHmUA)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=gb2312
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT

Since BGP commuity can only classify routing information,if you want to apply QoS policy based on BGP ,you can use BGP 

community to classify route information, then apply the TOS or some other QoS policy based on the classified route
information.

   For example:
  
   On the large network, to make classifing simple, usually, we can apply the QoS policy based on BGP. 
   
   The process is as following: 
   1. Before the BGP route information is advertised, we classify it by BGP community.  
   2. The accepter of BGP route information will match the classify route information then apply the policy.

   The process is complex.   
  
   To make the process simple, we can use the ExtCommunity to support
   QoS task. 
   
   If BGP Extended Community can map TOS value of IP header at the same time and keep the ability for classifing route 

information,the QoS policy based on BGP will be simple.
   
   For example:
   In the same AS, to make classifing simple.

   The process is as following:
   1. Before the BGP route information is advertised, we map the TOS value into ExtCommunity, and at the same time classify 

route information by ExtCommunity. The actions of classifying route information is optional, it is just for classifying route 

information.
  
   2. The accepter of BGP route information can directly apply the TOS policy which is carried by ExtCommunity.

   The process is simple.

--Boundary_(ID_/vjAkwWj8cWovQk1qcHmUA)
Content-type: text/html; charset=gb2312
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=gb2312">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2668" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Since BGP commuity can only classify routing information,if 
you want to apply QoS policy based on BGP ,you can use BGP </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>community to classify route information, then apply the TOS or 
some other QoS policy based on the classified route<BR>information.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>&nbsp;&nbsp; For example:<BR>&nbsp; <BR>&nbsp;&nbsp; On the 
large network, to make classifing simple, usually, we can apply the QoS policy 
based on BGP. <BR>&nbsp;&nbsp; <BR>&nbsp;&nbsp; The process is as following: 
<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp; 1. Before the BGP route information is advertised, we classify 
it by BGP community.&nbsp; <BR>&nbsp;&nbsp; 2. The accepter of BGP route 
information will match the classify route information then apply the 
policy.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>&nbsp;&nbsp; The process is complex.&nbsp;&nbsp; <BR>&nbsp; 
<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp; To make the process simple, we can use the ExtCommunity to 
support<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp; QoS task. <BR>&nbsp;&nbsp; <BR>&nbsp;&nbsp; If BGP 
Extended Community can map TOS value of IP header at the same time and keep the 
ability for classifing route </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>information,the QoS policy based on BGP will be 
simple.<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp; <BR>&nbsp;&nbsp; For example:<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp; In the 
same AS, to make classifing simple.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>&nbsp;&nbsp; The process is as following:<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp; 1. 
Before the BGP route information is advertised, we map the TOS value into 
ExtCommunity, and at the same time classify </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>route information by ExtCommunity. The actions of classifying 
route information is optional, it is just for classifying route </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>information.<BR>&nbsp; <BR>&nbsp;&nbsp; 2. The accepter of BGP 
route information can directly apply the TOS policy which is carried by 
ExtCommunity.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>&nbsp;&nbsp; The process is simple.</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

--Boundary_(ID_/vjAkwWj8cWovQk1qcHmUA)--

--===============1286192936==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

--===============1286192936==--