[145229] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Cisco 7600 PFC3B(XL) and IPv6 packets with fragmentation header
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher Morrow)
Fri Sep 30 21:45:54 2011
In-Reply-To: <3B77D4F9-F20A-4560-A549-43FB72E1AF68@arbor.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2011 21:44:52 -0400
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
To: "Dobbins, Roland" <rdobbins@arbor.net>
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 9:32 PM, Dobbins, Roland <rdobbins@arbor.net> wrote=
:
> On Sep 30, 2011, at 11:44 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>
>> this is exactly why punting anything NOT management and/or routing-proto=
cols should be banned. Thanks for making that point explicitly.
>
> And this is the requirement which should be placed in RFPs, along with ot=
her specific requirements for ACL handling, flow telemetry functionality, u=
RPF, et. al.
>
> If folks want to influence vendors to do the Right Thing, they have to ex=
pend the time and effort to quantify and qualify said Right Thing(s), and t=
hen put it into RFP requirements. =A0Otherwise, complaining post-procuremen=
t isn't generally going to accomplish much.
>
yes, my bitchfest was also a 'could we all start asking for this, now?' ...=
:)
