IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] Query on draft-ietf-idr-bgp4-mibv2-15

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Mon, 20 November 2017 16:55 UTC

Return-Path: <acee@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6BC1129C0C for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 08:55:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.52
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.52 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lOSTTCp7w1zd for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 08:55:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.86.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09FCB129C13 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 08:55:25 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1812; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1511196925; x=1512406525; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=88mrCYYw2xzdARFG8I2yKmr6jbKw/EbeZdyXZI3EfRw=; b=ce2kbnHRqjSAZ0izwSNV47IcqgporoiIndX+52K/2ZMgR7PMR+IyYNzh 6saHT3x4U1+51wipdI0SJG+k70R8ihWBkx0Uf0+zJd6RWYuOotR82GgkI br2Gt1WBE9nmqg8cPhPBxyjXIyfv8QMvSPvioOF7VHSZ79fIqqppYuwcU 4=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DAAADzBxNa/40NJK1bGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQcBAQEBAYM8Zm4nB4N4ih+PKIF9lmKCEQojhRgCGoRlPxgBAQEBAQEBAQFrKIUfAQUjEUUQAgEIGAICJgICAjAVEAIEDgWKJRCoS4IninUBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEYBYEPgiWCB4M+gyuFGxeCfoJjBaI+ApUKk0yWBQIRGQGBOQEfOYFbGXoVgy2CYReBZgF3AYo3gRQBAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.44,428,1505779200"; d="scan'208";a="312477063"
Received: from alln-core-8.cisco.com ([173.36.13.141]) by rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 20 Nov 2017 16:55:25 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-014.cisco.com (xch-rtp-014.cisco.com [64.101.220.154]) by alln-core-8.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id vAKGtNCi008849 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 20 Nov 2017 16:55:23 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-014.cisco.com (64.101.220.154) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:55:22 -0500
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:55:22 -0500
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
CC: Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal <muthu.arul@gmail.com>, "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Idr] Query on draft-ietf-idr-bgp4-mibv2-15
Thread-Index: AQHTYgqaPU73EXVN2U2vsPMt+Jaef6MdYEKAgABaG4D//8I2AA==
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 16:55:22 +0000
Message-ID: <D6387140.DA793%acee@cisco.com>
References: <CAKz0y8yesGQrmmLNm4rJL_=W53tr-Kp2OpgqR_q9qkp3rPa2gQ@mail.gmail.com> <D6385A04.DA762%acee@cisco.com> <5A12F675.2030106@foobar.org>
In-Reply-To: <5A12F675.2030106@foobar.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.198]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <FF4C6B4D7AECF246B40BDF48F88BD6C7@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/DFDCUmpNM0Z83wCPDKvdgsdD_gI>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Query on draft-ietf-idr-bgp4-mibv2-15
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 16:55:28 -0000

Hi Nick, 

As you know, there are vendor-specific MIBs that satisfy the referenced
requirements. However, unless the IDR WG were to agree on one of the
vendor MIBs, it would likely take some time to standardize MIB extensions
to RFC 4273. Given that there is only so much energy in the WG, my opinion
is that the focus should now be on publishing the BGP and VPN YANG models.
However, I would not actively oppose work on IDR MIB extensions.

Thanks,
Acee
P.S. I knew I should have left this E-mail to the chairs ;^)

On 11/20/17, 10:36 AM, "Nick Hilliard" <nick@foobar.org> wrote:

>Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
>> The IETF has moved on from SNMP-based management to YANG, refer to this
>> IESG statement:
>> 
>> https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/writable-mib-module.html
>
>the rest of the world is going to take many years to catch up with this
>decision - usable YANG is only beginning to make its way into a small
>segment of high-end kit out there, and there is a large segment of
>market kit where it is likely never to be deployed.
>
>In the meantime - in this particular situation - we have no means of
>monitoring ipv6 or vrf-enabled bgp sessions, other than screen-scraping.
> It shouldn't need pointing out that this is a deficit with serious
>operational consequences.
>
>Nick

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email