On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Claudio Jeker <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 12:45:00PM -0400, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 12:31 PM, Claudio Jeker
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 07:45:24AM -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>> >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts 
>> >> directories.
>> >> This draft is a work item of the Global Routing Operations Working Group 
>> >> of the IETF.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>       Title           : BGP Monitoring Protocol
>> >>       Author(s)       : J. Scudder, et al.
>> >>       Filename        : draft-ietf-grow-bmp-04.txt
>> >>       Pages           : 16
>> >>       Date            : 2010-06-14
>> >>
>> >> This document proposes a simple protocol, BMP, which can be used to
>> >> monitor BGP sessions.  BMP is intended to provide a more convenient
>> >> interface for obtaining route views for research purpose than the
>> >> screen-scraping approach in common use today.  The design goals are
>> >> to keep BMP simple, useful, easily implemented, and minimally
>> >> service-affecting.  BMP is not suitable for use as a routing
>> >> protocol.
>> >>
>> >> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
>> >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-grow-bmp-04.txt
>> >>
>> >
>> > I'm wondering why it is necessary to have a new way of dumping tables and
>> > updates. IMO the MRT format is a very well known and accepted format.
>> > There are existing parser libraries and many bgp implementations already
>> > support this format.
>> > Wouldn't it be better to make a joined effort to merge MRT and BMP?
>>
>> bmp dumps the adj-rib-in ... with (I believe) some extra data that
>> MRT's not getting. I thought also that larry was looking to integrate
>> BMP feeds into the collector system that uses MRT today? (mrt being
>> the output format from a bgp listener like quagga)
>>
>
> Which table is dumped is only an implementation detail. MRT could very
> well dump the adj-rib-in or even the adj-rib-out. Some implementations do
> allow that already.
>

near as I know... my juniper or cisco can't spew mrt ... bmp is/was
planned as a feature for routing devices to enable, on demand.

> It is very simple to extend the MRT format for the two new messages that
> BMP has. Adding the Initiation Message and Stats Reports to MRT would
> be simple.
>
> I just see no point in trying to reinvent the wheel.
> --
> :wq Claudio
>
_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow

Reply via email to