Subject: [Idr] BGP routes with color - Bad assumptions

From: Jeffrey Haas <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2022 15:42:23 -0400

-car and -ct authors,

A common refrain in our presentation slots for bgp routes with color,
partially reinforced by not enough mic time available, has been "stop saying
our proposal does X - no it doesn't".

Largely, such things point out a lack of common understanding between the
parties saying it.

I'd like to request that this thread be used to highlight repeated comments
where this has come up so we can try to close the gaps in understanding.

(And if you don't seed this yourselves, please expect this to be populated
with your names attached from the minutes.  The goal is not to "name and
shame", but such back and forth only during meeting session discussion is a
distraction from advancing the work.)

A few reminders:
- Let's keep our points to the functional aspects of the proposals.  As
  noted in the discussion about route resolution, the implementation details
  are sometimes a distraction.
- You don't have to LIKE someone's mechanism.  It's important to not
  mis-characterize it.  Also recall that you're not children, so don't go
  calling other people's stuff bad names.

-- Jeff

---

From: "Susan Hares" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2022 04:37:03 -0400

Jeff and IDR: 

Jeff - Thank you for this useful reminder! 
I'm pleased to see so many of you providing thoughtful review. 

Sue 

-----Original Message-----
From: Idr [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Haas
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2022 3:42 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [Idr] BGP routes with color - Bad assumptions

-car and -ct authors,

A few reminders:

-- Jeff

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