Re: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-grow-bmp-adj-rib-out-05

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Linda,

Thank you so much for your review and comments.  Please see response inline marked [tievens].


On 6/14/19, 1:44 PM, "Linda Dunbar via Datatracker" <noreply@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
    
    Summary:
    
    The draft updates the BGP Monitoring Protocol BMP by adding access to the
    Adj-RIB-Out RIBs. There are some unclear areas that need authors to clarify.
    
    Major issues:
    
    Minor issues:
    
    Section 1 last paragraph:
    It is not clear if BMP sender send to multiple BMP receivers  or just  to one
    "BMP receiver". The first part of the sentence says "..send to a BMP
    receivers", the second part says ".. advertise to BGP peers, .."
    
    Suggest to make it consistent, such as sending  to multiple, or just one.   "..
    to send to BMP receivers what it advertises.."

[tievens] There are one or more receivers for each sender. The implementation 
defines how many receivers it can send to.   I've updated it to:

  "Adding Adj-RIB-Out provides the ability for a BMP sender to send to 
   BMP receivers what it advertises to BGP peers, which can be used for
   outbound policy validation and to monitor RIBs that were advertised."

    
    Does a BMP sender also send out Adj-RIB-In? it is not clear to.

[tievens] Yes, RFC7854 defines Adj-RIB-In only.  How about the below?

  "BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) RFC 7854 [RFC7854] only defines Adj-
   RIB-In being sent to BMP receivers.  This document updates section
   4.2 [RFC7854] per-peer header by adding a new flag to distinguish
   Adj-RIB-In verses Adj-RIB-Out. BMP senders use the new flag to send
   either Adj-RIB-In or Adj-RIB-Out."

    
    Section 6 first sentence: just curious which BMP messages are NOT applicable to
    Adj-RIB-In or Adj-RIB-out?   If it is specified in other documents, please add
    a reference.
    
[tievens] How about the below update to clarify some.   I didn’t want to create a list
of them because it could be different in updated/new drafts.

 "Many BMP messages have a per-peer header but some are not applicable
  to Adj-RIB-In or Adj-RIB-Out monitoring, such as peer up and down
  notficiations."



    Nits/editorial comments:
    
    Thank you.
    
    Linda Dunbar
    
    





[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux