Hi Jakob, Thats clear. Apology. I was not precise enough. I would prefer the reliability to be solved on application layer than on transport layer since in a large scale BMP data collection, multiple daemons collect the BMP messages and failover among can occur.
Best wishes Thomas From: Jakob Heitz (jheitz) <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2021 7:47 AM To: Graf Thomas, INI-NET-TCZ-ZH1 <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: RE: [GROW] is TCP the right layer for BMP session resumption? QUIC is not stateless. BMP over QUIC is not BMP over UDP. BMP requires reliable transfer. The state to provide reliability must exist somewhere. If not in TCP (or QUIC), then in the app. Regards, Jakob. From: GROW <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 10:21 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [GROW] is TCP the right layer for BMP session resumption? Hi John and Robert, Speaking as a network operator. I absolutely agree on your thoughts that a stateless transport would be preferred over a stateful. Best wishes Thomas From: GROW <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of Robert Raszuk Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 10:38 PM To: John Kristoff <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [GROW] is TCP the right layer for BMP session resumption? I second John's comment with a bit more optimism. As gRPC over QUIC is becoming a reality and de-facto messaging standard there is going to be hardly any choice for any router's vendor to resist to implement it. Best, R. On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 9:57 PM John Kristoff <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: On Tue, 9 Mar 2021 20:44:18 +0000 "Jakob Heitz \(jheitz\)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > I've seen this session resumption technique in the '90s. > BMP is a one-way protocol. The BMP server sends nothing. I kind of wish my BMP router monitor was able to transport data over UDP to the listening station like syslog and flow data. I would have especially liked this after that time a blocked TCP port and the inability to opena TCP connection once caused my BMP monitor router doing the active open to crash (known and now fixed bug). > Thus adding this is a significant rework of BMP. I assume my desire for UDP above will never happen as a result. Oh well. John _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fgrow&data=04%7C01%7CThomas.Graf%40swisscom.com%7Caeb70a60fdea4de1e35508d8e39063e6%7C364e5b87c1c7420d9beec35d19b557a1%7C1%7C0%7C637509556577796273%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=bXIQVx7BxqYeKIwvY2tLbxu2sWzz4oBvqcnrk69Dzh4%3D&reserved=0>
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
