On Tue, Apr 07, 2026 at 08:58:14AM +0000, Wolfgang Tremmel wrote: > Reviewing -15, I find: > > " * Routes carried by BGP MUST NOT carry RPKI validation states in > transitive BGP path attributes > [I-D.ietf-sidrops-avoid-rpki-state-in-bgp]." > > is "MUST NOT" a bit too strong here? > > That would forbid to set a BGP Community reflecting the outcome of an > RPKI check,
What words would help stop the harmful practise? > which is current practice for example for our (DE-CIX) route servers. Right, this is _exactly_ NOT a good practise, and its been extensively documented why it isn't a good practise. Based on what you say, I have to conclude that the DE-CIX route servers are configured in a way that is inefficient and a burden for its peers. Why is it set up this way? :-) Would it help your team if the document used stronger words? Kind regards, Job (no hats) _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
