* This TLV, in all possibility, can go in messages other than just the Route Monitoring message.
+ 1 with Dhananjay on this. We also see a need for such a name space for another TLV in our draft (currently in Rmon namespace), will discuss this in our upcoming WG meeting. Thanks, /snnp (Prasad) From: Dhananjay Patki (dhpatki) <[email protected]> Sent: 31 October 2025 22:46 To: [email protected] Cc: grow <[email protected]> Subject: [GROW] Comment on draft-younsi-grow-bmp-snts-01 Hello Authors, This draft requests Timestamp TLV type be assigned from "BMP Route Monitoring TLVs" registry. However, the section below indicates that the timestamp TLV could be included in Peer-Up/Peer-Down messages (since it mentions 'BMP session going down or up'). 2.1.1. <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-younsi-grow-bmp-snts-01#section-2.1.1> Trigger Time<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-younsi-grow-bmp-snts-01#name-trigger-time> The Trigger Time is the timestamp of the event which triggered BMP to report the event. This might be a received message, a BGP peering or a BMP session going down or up, etc. Should the Timestamp TLV belong to a new "Generic BMP TLVs" registry that has TLVs that could be used in multiple BMP message types? This TLV, in all possibility, can go in messages other than just the Route Monitoring message. -- Regards, Dhananjay
_______________________________________________ GROW mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
