IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Mon, 20 November 2017 17:28 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 B970C129A96 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 09:28:13 -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 AOa2Jbp4sMHR for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 09:28:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.86.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D96221275AB for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 09:28:11 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2370; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1511198891; x=1512408491; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=AxjWtseCqhJdB5kQKr1kBzbiQU4wB1UV9EAqIRtFX+8=; b=NIWrRpjkZEkclUl5vTaDxpYK+NyWMN3OiYjOtPihx+0q8eK77oOmWVbh udaJxSvykOezi+9mNiZVJaEjAOgXAY52FRgMU5r8I8dHXtdhj5D9u4UPS A24FDcvCIR0s0/MKX5rgzH7lUOh1BjjjhYMrd3rDAIlNhPL3aEeoB9S66 U=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DAAADvDxNa/40NJK1bGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQcBAQEBAYM8Zm4nB4N4ih+PKIF9lmKCEQojhRgCGoRlPxgBAQEBAQEBAQFrKIUfAQUjEUUQAgEIGAICJgICAjAVEAIEDgWKJRCoToIninUBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEYBYEPgiWCB4M+gyuFGxeCfoJjBYotiTmOWAKHcI0ak0yMcokTAhEZAYE5AR85gVsZehWDLYJhF4FmAXcBijeBFAEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.44,428,1505779200"; d="scan'208";a="104975710"
Received: from alln-core-8.cisco.com ([173.36.13.141]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 20 Nov 2017 17:28:10 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com (xch-rtp-012.cisco.com [64.101.220.152]) by alln-core-8.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id vAKHSA31004642 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 20 Nov 2017 17:28:10 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com (64.101.220.152) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 12:28:09 -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 12:28:09 -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//8I2AIAACSmA
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 17:28:09 +0000
Message-ID: <D638794A.DA7DA%acee@cisco.com>
References: <CAKz0y8yesGQrmmLNm4rJL_=W53tr-Kp2OpgqR_q9qkp3rPa2gQ@mail.gmail.com> <D6385A04.DA762%acee@cisco.com> <5A12F675.2030106@foobar.org> <D6387140.DA793%acee@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <D6387140.DA793%acee@cisco.com>
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: <9F9570A83BD31448BC7D6B1249E1E8DC@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/nej0U8NPbWKaxeOjLoWYlj8-WS4>
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 17:28:14 -0000

OTOH, I looked at the expired draft and it seems pretty straightforward.
Additionally, there is still work going on in BESS on needed MIBs (e.g.):

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-mib/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-l2l3-vpn-mcast-mib/

Thanks,
Acee 

On 11/20/17, 11:55 AM, "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> wrote:

>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