Hi Mukul

Thanks for the prompt reply, and indeed to address the blocking DISCUSS a 
revised I-D must be uploaded for the DISCUSS point

Regards

-éric


Cisco Confidential
From: Srivastava, Mukul <[email protected]>
Date: Wednesday, 12 November 2025 at 16:40
To: Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <[email protected]>, The IESG <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] 
<[email protected]>, [email protected] 
<[email protected]>, [email protected] <[email protected]>, [email protected] 
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [GROW] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on 
draft-ietf-grow-bmp-bgp-rib-stats-13: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
Hello All

Pls see my response below with MS:

>>> DISCUSS (blocking) comments
[MS] - My understanding is that these statistics are only for BMP rib-in and 
rib-out monitoring. I am not sure how/when some of the stats mentioned in 
section 4 were marked for local-rib monitoring. I will wait for my co-author 
response on this.

>>> ### Section 1
[MS] I agree and that can be updated by removing sentence 1.

>>> ### Section 3.1
[MS] Personally I am fine with the current format for describing the stats like 
- "name (type = #, format) longer description”.  This aligns with the prior BMP 
RFCs of describing stats. As you pointed this is more like a personal taste.

I feel that a router should send both types on wire (ex 7 & 18) if it is able 
to do so. Let BMP collectors decide what it wants to do when it receives both 
types. Also, it is likely that there are applications already build using 
existing type 7 and we don’t want to break that when type 18 is implemented by 
someone using this draft.
In fact, I feel we shouldn’t provide any recommendations in this draft about 
which type should be streamed out by router and consumed by BMP station. This 
is more like an implementation detail.

>>> ### Section 7 and 10.2
[MS] Sure the document can be updated for this.

Let me know if you all agree or have further comments.

One clarification - I am assuming, we need to publish a new version with above 
changes. Kindly confirm.

Thanks
Mukul
From: Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <[email protected]>
Date: Wednesday, November 12, 2025 at 9:54 AM
To: The IESG <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] 
<[email protected]>, [email protected] 
<[email protected]>, [email protected] <[email protected]>, [email protected] 
<[email protected]>
Subject: [GROW] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-grow-bmp-bgp-rib-stats-13: 
(with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-grow-bmp-bgp-rib-stats-13: Discuss

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to 
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GV_tlXr7JEuw_CJX6796BZn5cZCW3M3m4Ptv10kRf3JxiEKAbl-yRBh1skIb7D4sL8sZsQHfg1yz$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GV_tlXr7JEuw_CJX6796BZn5cZCW3M3m4Ptv10kRf3JxiEKAbl-yRBh1skIb7D4sL8sZsQHfg1yz$>
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-grow-bmp-bgp-rib-stats/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GV_tlXr7JEuw_CJX6796BZn5cZCW3M3m4Ptv10kRf3JxiEKAbl-yRBh1skIb7D4sL8sZsdZl3P-1$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-grow-bmp-bgp-rib-stats/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GV_tlXr7JEuw_CJX6796BZn5cZCW3M3m4Ptv10kRf3JxiEKAbl-yRBh1skIb7D4sL8sZsdZl3P-1$>



----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------


# Éric Vyncke, INT AD, comments for draft-ietf-grow-bmp-bgp-rib-stats-13
CC @evyncke

Thank you for the work put into this document.

Please find below one blocking DISCUSS points (easy to address), some
non-blocking COMMENT points/nits (replies would be appreciated even if only for
my own education).

Special thanks to Job Snijders for the shepherd's write-up including the WG
consensus *and* the justification of the intended status.

I hope that this review helps to improve the document,

Regards,

-éric

## DISCUSS (blocking)

As noted in
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/statement-iesg-handling-ballot-positions-20220121/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GV_tlXr7JEuw_CJX6796BZn5cZCW3M3m4Ptv10kRf3JxiEKAbl-yRBh1skIb7D4sL8sZsVWfKqjI$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/statement-iesg-handling-ballot-positions-20220121/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GV_tlXr7JEuw_CJX6796BZn5cZCW3M3m4Ptv10kRf3JxiEKAbl-yRBh1skIb7D4sL8sZsVWfKqjI$>
 ,
a DISCUSS ballot is a request to have a discussion on the points below; I
really think that the document would be improved with a change here, but can be
convinced otherwise.

### Section 3.3

There is no section 3.3 to list the types for Loc-RIB, the reader has to wait
until section 4 to see this mentioned in the "summary", which is NOT a summary
as it specifies the available value for Loc-RIB. I.e., add a section 3.3
listing the type numbers available for Loc-RIB.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------


## COMMENTS (non-blocking)

### Section 1

Mostly cosmetic but the 1st sentence of the 2nd paragraph has little value, the
2nd sentence seems to be enough.

### Section 3.1

It is a matter of taste of course, but I would have preferred to have the
statistic types presented as "name (type = #, format) longer description" as
starting with the type number is cumbersome for the reader.

I also failed to understand the logic of sending only one (as opposed to the
latest version of this I-D) type when two are available (e.g., for types 7 &
18), should there be some recommendations ?

### Section 7

Please use the exact URI of
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.iana.org/assignments/bmp-parameters/bmp-parameters.xhtml*statistics-types__;Iw!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GV_tlXr7JEuw_CJX6796BZn5cZCW3M3m4Ptv10kRf3JxiEKAbl-yRBh1skIb7D4sL8sZsSYHBla9$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.iana.org/assignments/bmp-parameters/bmp-parameters.xhtml*statistics-types__;Iw!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GV_tlXr7JEuw_CJX6796BZn5cZCW3M3m4Ptv10kRf3JxiEKAbl-yRBh1skIb7D4sL8sZsSYHBla9$>

### Section 10.2

As indicated by the idnits tool, s/Informational References/*Informative*
References/



_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to