I thought AS5397 said it was a limited test back in Feb 2005?

[Daniel Roesen]

On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 10:07:03AM +0300, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> They are at it again:
> 
> Apr 19 17:36:10 gp1 2117: Apr 19 17:36:09: %BGP-6-ASPATH: Long AS path 
> 20965 1299 3320 15589 15589 5397 
> {33,109,145,278,293,513,559,1257,1275,1752,1853,2042,2497,2500,2607,2914,3257,3265,3292,3352,3425,3549,3748,3786,4691,4697,4716,4725,5609,5623,6175,6320,6342,6435,6830,6939,7033,8447,10566,12779,13944,14277,17715,17965,24136,24895,29686,31103,32266} 
> received from 2001:798:201B:10AA::1: More than configured MAXAS-LIMIT

Lorenzo,

in a 2005-03-01 posting to {nanog at merit.edu, routing-wg at ripe.net,
ris-users at ripe.net} you've announced the plan to do those experiments
in IPv4 world and you heard a lot of concerns. In the same mail you
wrote "We have been performing similar experiments over IPv6, in
collaboration with the NAMEX internet exchange, since December 2004
with no ill effects".

I guess what Hank sees is exactly that, can you confirm?

The thread concluded that your group will come up with a document
explaining the technique and why it won't harm. "Once it is ready we
will post a link to this list and elsewhere so people can comment on it,
discussion can continue, and hopefully aconsensus can be found on the
use of the techniques. We hope to have something ready in two to three
weeks.".

By these words, I do understand that you cease those experiments until
consensus is reached.

I'm not able to find any later posting from you that publishes the
document, or any discussion.

So I wonder why you continue those experiments in IPv6? The IPv6 DFZ
ain't a playground, not more than the IPv4 DFZ.

Please let us know what's going on there. Thanks!


Regards,
Daniel

-- 
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr at cluenet.de -- dr at IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0