Re: draft-ietf-ptomaine-nopeer-01.txt

[Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>]

>> a - the whole purpose of this exercise is to create a well-known
>>     community that operators treat as transitive
> Let's not play the words. IANA allocation is done in protocol-specific
> terms. Unlike BGP attributes, communities do not have the
> well-know/optional characteristic. Transitivity is defined for
> extended communities, not the regular ones. IANA and the potential
> reader will need to ignore these words to avoid confusion.

<http://psg.com/~randy/970605.nanog.com/>

>> b - as there is no extended community (show me the rfc), the current
>>     reference is not ambiguous.
> When/if there is one, the document will be confusing.

not sane to start normative references to future possbibilities.  this
way lies chaos.

randy