Recommendation for Not Using AS_SET and AS_CONFED_SET in BGP
RFC 6472

Revision differences

Document history

Date Rev. By Action
2015-10-14
06 (System) Notify list changed from idr-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-as-sets@ietf.org to (None)
2012-08-22
06 (System) post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Dan Romascanu
2012-08-22
06 (System) post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Adrian Farrel
2011-12-08
06 Cindy Morgan State changed to RFC Published from RFC Ed Queue.
2011-12-08
06 Cindy Morgan [Note]: changed to 'BCP 172; RFC 6472'
2011-12-08
06 (System) RFC published
2011-10-11
06 Amy Vezza State changed to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent.
2011-10-10
06 (System) IANA Action state changed to No IC from In Progress
2011-10-10
06 (System) IANA Action state changed to In Progress
2011-10-10
06 Cindy Morgan IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent
2011-10-10
06 Cindy Morgan IESG has approved the document
2011-10-10
06 Cindy Morgan Closed "Approve" ballot
2011-10-10
06 Cindy Morgan Approval announcement text regenerated
2011-10-07
06 Stewart Bryant Ballot writeup text changed
2011-10-07
06 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-as-sets-06.txt
2011-09-08
06 Cindy Morgan Removed from agenda for telechat
2011-09-08
06 Cindy Morgan State changed to Approved-announcement to be sent::Point Raised - writeup needed from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead.
2011-09-08
06 Dan Romascanu [Ballot Position Update] Position for Dan Romascanu has been changed to No Objection from Discuss
2011-09-08
06 Adrian Farrel
[Ballot comment]
Thank you for addressing my Discuss and Comment. I have cleared my Discuss on the basis of the RFC Editor note, but please …
2011-09-08
06 Adrian Farrel [Ballot Position Update] Position for Adrian Farrel has been changed to No Objection from Discuss
2011-09-08
06 Stewart Bryant Ballot writeup text changed
2011-09-08
06 Dan Romascanu
[Ballot comment]
1. I support comments made by the other ADs about improper use (or lack of use) of 2119 keywords.

2. In the Introduction …
2011-09-08
06 Dan Romascanu
[Ballot discuss]
The DISCUSS and COMMENT is partly based on the OPS-DIR review performed by Benson Schliesser.

1. The claim in the Abstract is confusing. …
2011-09-08
06 Dan Romascanu [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded
2011-09-07
06 Jari Arkko [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-09-07
06 Ralph Droms [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-09-07
06 Robert Sparks [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-09-07
06 David Harrington
[Ballot comment]
I support Adrian's Discuss, and pete's comments.
Either this is an update to the existing standards, and thus should be standards-track itself,
OR …
2011-09-07
06 David Harrington [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-09-07
06 Gonzalo Camarillo [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-09-06
06 Sean Turner [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded
2011-09-05
06 Ron Bonica [Ballot comment]
While I agree with Adrian's procedural comments, I believe that the basic idea is sound.
2011-09-05
06 Ron Bonica [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded
2011-09-04
06 Adrian Farrel
[Ballot comment]
I would like to see proper use of RFC 2119 language in Section 3

  strongly advised == RECOMMENDED
  should withdraw == …
2011-09-04
06 Adrian Farrel
[Ballot discuss]
This is a relatively small Discuss. I have already discussed it with Stewart and we think we undertand the intention, but I am …
2011-09-04
06 Adrian Farrel [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded
2011-09-04
06 Pete Resnick
[Ballot comment]
Paragraph 1 of section 3 has a couple of places that look appropriate for 2119 language: "are strongly advised to not" could easily …
2011-09-04
06 Pete Resnick [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-09-03
06 Russ Housley [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded
2011-09-02
06 Stephen Farrell [Ballot comment]
should this UPDATE something? e.g. RFCs 4271/5065 maybe
2011-09-02
06 Stephen Farrell [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-09-01
06 Wesley Eddy [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-08-31
06 Peter Saint-Andre [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-08-30
06 Stewart Bryant Placed on agenda for telechat - 2011-09-08
2011-08-30
06 Stewart Bryant Intended Status has been changed to BCP from Informational
2011-08-30
06 Stewart Bryant [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Stewart Bryant
2011-08-30
06 Stewart Bryant Ballot has been issued
2011-08-30
06 Stewart Bryant Created "Approve" ballot
2011-08-26
06 Samuel Weiler Request for Last Call review by SECDIR Completed. Reviewer: Jürgen Schönwälder.
2011-08-25
06 (System) State changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead from In Last Call.
2011-08-24
06 Amanda Baber We understand that this document doesn't require any IANA actions.
2011-08-19
06 Samuel Weiler Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Jürgen Schönwälder
2011-08-19
06 Samuel Weiler Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Jürgen Schönwälder
2011-08-11
06 Amy Vezza Last call sent
2011-08-11
06 Amy Vezza
State changed to In Last Call from Last Call Requested.

The following Last Call Announcement was sent out:

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org> …
2011-08-11
06 Stewart Bryant Ballot writeup text changed
2011-08-11
06 Stewart Bryant Last Call was requested
2011-08-11
06 (System) Ballot writeup text was added
2011-08-11
06 (System) Last call text was added
2011-08-11
06 (System) Ballot approval text was added
2011-08-11
06 Stewart Bryant State changed to Last Call Requested from Publication Requested::AD Followup.
2011-08-11
06 Stewart Bryant Last Call text changed
2011-07-27
06 (System) Sub state has been changed to AD Follow up from New Id Needed
2011-07-27
05 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-as-sets-05.txt
2011-07-15
06 Stewart Bryant State changed to Publication Requested::Revised ID Needed from Publication Requested.
Please change to BCP.
2011-07-12
06 Cindy Morgan
This is the completed Document Shepherd Write-Up as required by RFC
4858 for the draft draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-as-sets-04. This
template was completed 2011-07-07.

The template version is …
2011-07-12
06 Cindy Morgan Draft added in state Publication Requested
2011-07-12
06 Cindy Morgan [Note]: 'John Scudder (jgs@juniper.net) is the document shepherd.' added
2011-05-02
04 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-as-sets-04.txt
2011-04-24
03 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-as-sets-03.txt
2011-01-16
02 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-as-sets-02.txt
2010-12-29
01 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-as-sets-01.txt
2010-11-19
00 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-as-sets-00.txt