Subject: Re: Open Routing Area meeting in Vienna

From: Yakov Rekhter <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 09:14:15 -0700

Dorian,

[clipped..]

> Along the same vein, I wonder how many other operators started out with
> a strong stance against overloading of BGP, and after years of tilting
> at that windmill and observing that vendors continues to pile on new
> "feature" after "feature" into BGP, just gave up?
> 
> I certainly have. As an operator stability and optimal performance of
> BGP implementations are of upmost concern for me, and there was a time
> that many others appeared to feel the same. Afterall, MSDP didn't end
> up in BGP and became a separate protocol because of that concern.
> 
> However, since then I've seen vendors continually ignore our concern
> and input and overload other features into BGP. 
> 
> There are those who say that it's operators' need to deploy new services
> that's been causing this, but from my perspective, when/where we do use
> new gadgets in BGP to rollout new service deployments it's because vendors
> have already put those gadgets into their BGP implementation despite my 
> feedback, and there's only so much time and energy we can spend bashing
> our heads against the brick wall. Afterall, we have a network to run and 
> services to deploy.

In a market-driven economy vendors usually pay attention to $$$, not 
to a person's bashing his/her head against the brick wall.

Yakov.

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

---

From: Yakov Rekhter <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 09:14:15 -0700

Dorian,

[clipped..]

Yakov.