Job Snijders wrote:
Can we, based on the observation that irrtoolset will consider any extension to the RPSL rp-attribute dictionary an error, conclude that RPSL can not be extended in this direction?
How did you come to this conclusion? irrtoolset is non rfc compliant, not the other way around. At a practical level, it's relatively easy to add a new token into the rpsl parser to shut irrtoolset up, even if it's a mess to add proper support for large communities to the code so that they actually do what you'd expect of them.
Another approach would be to introduce yet another 'import/export'-style attribute, so that we'd have 'import:', 'export:', 'mp-import:', 'mp-export:', 'import-via:', 'export-via:', and now also: 'import-via-large:', 'export-via-large:'. Though this doesn't strike me as a healthy direction for growth and extendability.
No need for export-via-large. "export-via" was required because it changed the semantics of the export stanza. Nick