Thomas, Asking again the important question my response to Camilo:
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 04:33:57AM +0000, [email protected] wrote: > Camilo> Regarding your question and the scenario you describe, I personally > care more about the final state than transient churn. Therefore, it would be > nice to use as many tricks as we can to hide the churn behind state > compression, but I accept some churn is unavoidable, and we will have to > handle this on the receiving end. > > +1 on final state. The transient churn are less interesting Perhaps this motivates the question about the desire for this bit of state? Is it wanted real-time? Is it solely to avoid running proxy analysis on the BMP receiver when it can't fully understand the implementation's route selection algorithm? What's *your* use case for it? This sort of state is helpful in a CLI when you're trying to address a specific operational issue. It's often a signal that policy needs to be modified. Knowing such state for 1M Internet routes? This seems somewhat less helpful. -- Jeff _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
