Re: [GROW] Working Group Last Call (WGLC) for draft-ietf-grow-bmp-peer-up (start 22/Jan/2024 end 6/Feb/2024)

[Maxence Younsi]

Dear all,


I support the adoption of draft-ietf-grow-bmp-peer-up.

A small detail I think could be changed is that the definition of a 
string in Section 2 should specify that the length in the TLV's Length 
field is in bytes and not a number of character ("whose length *in 
bytes* is given by [...]" ). It is already specified in Section 3.3:


   *  Information Length (2 bytes): The length of the following
  Information field, in bytes.

but not in Section 2:

2.  String Definition

   A string TLV is a free-form sequence of UTF-8 characters whose length
   is given by the TLV's Length field.  There is no requirement to
   terminate the string with a null (or any other particular) character
   -- the Length field gives its termination.



Kind regards,

Maxence.
___
GROW mailing list
GROW@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow

Re: [GROW] Working Group Last Call (WGLC) for draft-ietf-grow-bmp-peer-up (start 22/Jan/2024 end 6/Feb/2024)

[Thomas.Graf]

Dear GROW,

Thanks a lot! I support the publication of the document.

Best wishs
Thomas

-Original Message-
From: GROW  On Behalf Of Job Snijders
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2024 8:21 PM
To: grow@ietf.org
Subject: [GROW] Working Group Last Call (WGLC) for draft-ietf-grow-bmp-peer-up 
(start 22/Jan/2024 end 6/Feb/2024)


Be aware: This is an external email.



Dear all,

As requested during the IETF 118 GROW session in Prague, Czechia, a "Working 
Group Last Call" is now issued for draft-ietf-grow-bmp-peer-up.
This phase will last about 2 weeks. We'd love to hear from you, especially from 
BMP implementers!

Please review the document, consider whether it should advance in the 
publication pipeline, and provide feedback! ... before February 6th, please :-)

The abstract for draft-ietf-grow-bmp-peer-up:

"""
RFC 7854, BMP, uses different message types for different purposes.
Most of these are Type, Length, Value (TLV) structured. One message
type, the Peer Up message, lacks a set of TLVs defined for its use,
instead sharing a namespace with the Initiation message. Subsequent
experience has shown that this namespace sharing was a mistake, as
it hampers the extension of the protocol.

This document updates RFC 7854 by creating an independent namespace
for the Peer Up message. It also updates RFC 8671 and RFC 9069 by
moving the defined codepoints in the newly introduced registry. The
changes in this document are formal only, compliant implementations
of RFC 7854, RFC 8671 and RFC 9069 also comply with this
specification.
"""

The internet-draft itself and associated information are available at:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-grow-bmp-peer-up/

Kind regards,

Job
GROW co-chair

___
GROW mailing list
GROW@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
GROW mailing list
GROW@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow