RFC becomes Visio

Eric Adler eaptech at gmail.com
Sat Sep 29 03:05:09 UTC 2012


Why not RFC 5514 over RFC 2410 encryption over RFC2549 enhanced
RFC1149 with all sessions padded with a number (generated by a server
compliant with RFC3091) of the packets described in RFC6592?  Oh, and
don't forget to set the bit described in RFC3514 as appropriate.

Or, ya know, one could just draw up a quick document or a note stating
the frivolous nature of such.

Eric

On 9/28/12, Robert Bonomi <bonomi at mail.r-bonomi.com> wrote:
>
>> Mike Lyon <mike.lyon at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Seth Mattinen <sethm at rollernet.us>
>> wrote:
>> > On 9/28/12 11:08 AM, Joe Maimon wrote:
>> > > Just got told by a Lightpath person that in order to do BGP on a
>> > > customer gig circuit to them they would need a visio diagram (of what
>> > > I
>> > > dont know).
>> > >
>> > > Has anybody else seen this brain damage?
>> >
>> > Hand draw two squares, label them "our AS" and "your AS" with a line
>> > between them labeled "GigE". Bonus points for pencil.
>> >
>>
>> And super duper bonus points is you draw pigeons carrying packets between
>> the two blocks and stating that you are RFC 1149 compliant.
>>
>
> No, no, *NO*!!
>
> The proper approach is to ask the vendor for RFC 1149 trasport for the BGP
> session, and whether it terminates in a shared cage, or if a fully private
> one is required.  Including an 'envionmental impact statement'.  Explaining
> that this info is required in order to produce an accurate Visio diagram.
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
Sent from my mobile device



More information about the NANOG mailing list