Hi All, This is the draft I just spoke about in our meeting.
Thanks, —John Begin forwarded message: From: John Scudder <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [GROW] Separating the BMP Initiation and Peer Up namespaces Date: February 7, 2019 at 9:07:43 PM GMT+1 To: Paolo Lucente <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Thanks, Paolo. GROW chairs, I'd like to propose this as a WG item. Regards, --John On Jan 23, 2019, at 9:05 AM, Paolo Lucente <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi John, [shared text] Ideally, i would like every BMP message type to have a (optional) TLV section, each with a own namespace. If the idea is shared, i’d look forward to see how to get there. Given the above, I do support this. Paolo On 15 Dec 2018, at 00:41, John Scudder <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi All, As I mentioned in the other thread, I think it was a mistake for Peer Up and Initiation to share a namespace in RFC 7854. The fact that it's difficult to get the text right in draft-ietf-grow-bmp-local-rib demonstrates this. My suggestion is that we separate the namespaces. I've written and submitted a short draft to do it, draft-scudder-grow-bmp-peer-up-00.txt [1]. It seemed the most expedient way to describe the suggested approach. If the WG likes the idea, we can adopt it, or if the WG wants to fix it a different way, let's discuss. An alternate solution would be to embrace the Information TLV as a namespace that's shared between multiple messages (the implication in draft-ietf-grow-bmp-local-rib that the Information TLV could be included in Peer Down suggests that's what the authors imagine would happen). I don't prefer this because it requires enumeration of exceptions ("foo Information type only applies when carried in such-and-such BMP message type..."). Independent namespaces ends up being a little wordier but less error-prone, IMO. Regards, --John [1] https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_id_draft-2Dscudder-2Dgrow-2Dbmp-2Dpeer-2Dup-2D00.txt&d=DwIFaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=hLt5iDJpw7ukqICc0hoT7A&m=LPelXJjYk_g20JRvzjj5Z57yrTysbVdFVF5HOfqclBw&s=x-wlUF_VuHZSdkJHN-UPkD3LjBIY6hhUEzRNOCKa7Wk&e= _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_grow&d=DwIFaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=hLt5iDJpw7ukqICc0hoT7A&m=LPelXJjYk_g20JRvzjj5Z57yrTysbVdFVF5HOfqclBw&s=zujlTq7Z94sjyfCLfICAHYyEwZK4r3Si0WsJuR3maP8&e= _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_grow&d=DwICAg&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=hLt5iDJpw7ukqICc0hoT7A&m=_d-zJpan1WHlv7NQSYb-arvxgHLrMy-yqHHMxtWKJtk&s=DTFEGoWwcbp0URVg38o4UhWSCd_cqPGtaTwv8D37Fv4&e=
_______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
