[db-wg] Proxy proposal large communities

On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 12:16 PM, Mark Prior <mrp at mrp.net> wrote:
> On 13/11/17 21:36, Job Snijders wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 12:01 PM, Mark Prior <mrp at mrp.net> wrote:
>>> In this particular case I would suggest that you do want the tool to
>>> complain rather than ignore the new rp-attribute.
>>
>> Why would you break backwards compatibility?
>>
> It's only broken if you include a large community formatted string in
> your policy and your tool doesn't support it. In that case I would like
> the script to break rather than load a broken configuration to a router
> that potentially causes chaos.

OK, but what about the tools from other people/organisations that parse your
autnum object?

I'm not sure why you ignore the recommendation "When changing the dictionary,
full compatibility should be maintained." without offering any
arguments on what the
benefits for doing so are.