Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-v6inixp-04.txt WGLC

[Eduardo Ascenço Reis <eduardo@intron.com.br>]

2010/1/18 Andy Davidson <andy@nosignal.org>:

> 6 - Route servers - md5 should be considered - I think this advice should be
> taken out, as this recommendation is not generally accepted, and the
> functioning/configuration of a route-server is well outside the scope of
> this document.

I agree with Andy and also suggest that the following sentence to be
removed from the document:

"The use of MD5 [RFC2385] or IPSEC [RFC4301] to
   authenticate the BGP sessions and the use of GTSM (The Generalized
   TTL Security Mechanism) [RFC3682] should be considered."

I understand that these mechanisms may help securing the BGP session,
but also that they do not fit well on an IPv6 operational document.

> 6 - Route servers - we may like to publish some information on v6 filtering
> to promote good hygiene between route-server peers.

I agree.

I also suggest to replace the word studied with considered on the
following sentence:
"Because of the size of the IPv6 space, limiting the maximum number of IPv6
   prefixes in every session should be studied."

[]s,

-- 

Eduardo Ascenço Reis