Re: On BGP and VPLS

Hi Kireeti!

[2858 related discussion]

I'll leave it to the WG participants to discuss this issue further.
My goal was to bring my concerns and attract attention to them.

Just one point for this discussion:

   2858 says:

   > This document defines extensions to BGP-4 to
   > enable it to carry routing information for multiple Network Layer
   > protocols (e.g., IPv6, IPX, etc...)

   Note the "Network Layer" part. The contents of the doc is also in
   terms of Network Layer addresses and routes. In no place does it
   imply that NLRI can be used to distribute arbitrary information.

> On the issues of BGP for VPLS and also of single solution vs. multiple,
> there seems to me (I'm not a PPVPN WG chair!) good consensus that the
> WG wants a BGP solution, and also that they want multiple solutions.
> Are you, Alex, proposing to override that consensus?

First, as you correctly said, consensus is to be determined by the WG
chairs, so leave it to them, please.

Second, I do not believe that any initiation of or participation in
a discussion by ADs should be considered as overriding any consensus.

Alex