> On Nov 19, 2016, at 9:59 AM, Neil J. McRae <[email protected]> wrote: > > We shouldn't be encouraging folks to build networks that for routine events > we then require more manual intervention when it's unwarranted. > > Why does it need to be free format?
Part of the motivation I had for suggesting the use of an existing sub-code is we have *not* changed the semantics in a machine-readable format. It's still "administrative shutdown". Today, you'd have zero extra information what it's about. The problem with attempting to move to the next set of levels of machine parseability is enumerating the full set of reasons that you would do such a shutdown. IMO, we're better off leaving this as freeform text. I'd also encourage the regional operators to think about what they'd like to *see* in such fields. Just because the protocol doesn't mandate fields doesn't mean you couldn't provide guidance as to what goes in there. Jared's case is what I find to be the normal one: - NOC contact# - NOC ticket# - Short reason why the session is down. (E.g. "you didn't pay your bill!") Again, the key is that the machine readable - and BGP standards backward compatible bit - hasn't changed. -- Jeff _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
