Chris,
> On Jul 16, 2022, at 6:19 PM, Christian Hopps wrote:
>
>
> Robert Raszuk writes:
>
>> Btw this independent attempt by two WG groups to normalize link state
>> data is a clear proof that the YANG model has failed here.
>
> I'm not sure which "YANG model" you are referring to here
Jeff,
> On Jul 10, 2022, at 5:14 PM, Jeff Tantsura wrote:
>
> Thanks Sue!
>
> We don’t have to always reinvent the wheel (at least not every time )
> I’m aware of at least 1 implementation streaming LSDB for TE consumers (gRPC)
> There are most probably some other vendor specific
Thanks Sue!We don’t have to always reinvent the wheel (at least not every time )I’m aware of at least 1 implementation streaming LSDB for TE consumers (gRPC)There are most probably some other vendor specific encodings/methods to steam to do that I believe – there has been some work around Kafka.
Jeff:
An interim sounds like a good plan.
[IDR-chair hat]
Alvaro has indicated that since all of the proposal received on the IDR list
are new protocol proposals,
* Capturing IDR’s input on BGP-LS problems and potential solutions is
appropriate for IDR as BGP-LS home.
* Refining any
Thx Jeff !
Also I welcome more reviews and suggestions for additions or deletions of
parts of it. For now I tried to keep it very simple for routers -
essentially setup new p2p TCP or QUIC sessions and send over exactly what
you put in BGP today. In the same time I see use cases beyond that so
Speaking as RTGWG chair:
Robert - I don’t think we’d have enough time to accommodate a good discussion
during IETF114 (we got only 1 slot), however would be happy to provide a
platform for an interim.
The topic is important and personally (being a very large BGP-LS user) I’d like
to see it
