Subject: [Idr] 2 week WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-rtc-no-rt

From: "Susan Hares" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 16:58:58 -0400

This begins a 2 week WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-rtc-no-rt (4/20/2015 to
5/4/2015).  You can see the draft at: 

http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-rtc-no-rt/

Other current drafts for Route Targets in IDR are: 

http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-rtc-hierarchical-rr/

http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ipv6-rt-constrain/

Appropriate questions for this WG LC are: 

1)      Does this default manner handling routes with no RTCs provide good
operational BGP for networks you are aware of? 

2)      Does this method of default work for you: 

RTC applied + MDT-SAFI   (SAFI=66) implies routes without RTs are
distributed

                RTC applied + MCAST-VPN (SAFI=6) implies routes without RTs
are distributed

                RTC applied + any other address family - implies routes
without RTs are not distributed

Should IANA create a registry which indicates the status of RTC application
or is the draft sufficient: 

Other IDR drafts on RT constraints are: 

http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-rtc-hierarchical-rr/

http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ipv6-rt-constrain/

Please indicate in your message discussing this approach an indication of
"support" or "no support". 

Sue Hares