Re: [OPSAWG] [GROW] FW: New Version Notification for draft-gu-network-mornitoring-protol-00.txt

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Fri, 06 July 2018 12:59 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.com>
X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A712130E34; Fri, 6 Jul 2018 05:59:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 6CSlQqK50SrO; Fri, 6 Jul 2018 05:59:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 619F3126F72; Fri, 6 Jul 2018 05:59:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.rg.net) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1fbQKZ-0005WS-Fq; Fri, 06 Jul 2018 12:59:23 +0000
Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2018 05:59:22 -0700
Message-ID: <m2o9fka5at.wl-randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Cc: Lizhenbin <lizhenbin@huawei.com>, lsr@ietf.org, GMO Crops <grow@ietf.org>, opsawg@ietf.org, RTGWG <rtgwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] [GROW] FW: New Version Notification for draft-gu-network-mornitoring-protol-00.txt
In-Reply-To: <CA+b+ER=1u=nyQ3edrqbyQ_8tuHWtynGoW==BWOEAV_1imTgJPQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <E793174E-A65C-4E8D-89D7-DC602C5494E8@cisco.com> <5A5B4DE12C0DAC44AF501CD9A2B01A8D8F43F070@dggemm512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <35FD4375-DF78-4E5B-A1A4-ACCC332A8E5E@cisco.com> <5A5B4DE12C0DAC44AF501CD9A2B01A8D8F43FE26@dggemm512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <m2y3ep9q4z.wl-randy@psg.com> <CA+b+ER=1u=nyQ3edrqbyQ_8tuHWtynGoW==BWOEAV_1imTgJPQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/25.3 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtgwg/KhiS1xhYvGTOrFljLiSZIACuuYw>
X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Working Group <rtgwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtgwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2018 12:59:36 -0000

> ​Why anyone would need BMP wrapper to monitor IGP ?

probably similar reasons that folk seem to need bgp-ls to get the
is-is/ospf databases.  is-is and ospf have decades of complexity
layered on un-simple bases.  so we seek yet another layer of gunk
through which to see them more 'simply.'

i would say an optimistic view might be that it will take a couple
more decades to gunk up bgp-ls and bmp so that we want yet another
layer.  but it would appear that my optimism is not warranted.

randy