Hi Jeff et All, I tried my hand at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saum-grow-bmp-afi-safi-evpn/ to trigger the discussion on per AFI/SAFI specific counters. Please review it.
Thanks, Saumya. From: Dikshit, Saumya <[email protected]> Date: Thursday, 7 August 2025 at 12:37 AM To: Jeffrey Haas <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [GROW] Query on draft-ietf-grow-bmp-bgp-rib-stats Hi Jeff, Thanks for the references. For the “mother ship” linkages I will look at this one. Though I have some experience in floating few of them in bess and nvo3, sometime back. Regards, Saumya. From: Jeffrey Haas <[email protected]> Date: Wednesday, 6 August 2025 at 5:38 PM To: Dikshit, Saumya <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [GROW] Query on draft-ietf-grow-bmp-bgp-rib-stats Saumya, On 8/5/25 22:43, Dikshit, Saumya wrote: And that said, nothing stops an effort from beginning one way and eventually heading to RFC the other. We have to start discussion somewhere. [SD] How should we start the discussions. This “mother ship” draft getting into WG should be the right place/time to do that :D E-mail to the grow mailing list is a start, certainly. For what you're asking about, what goes into the BMP statistics field in a new entry? How does it compare to existing ones? The list isn't the best way to outright do design and eventually the answer is to write a new internet-draft. This eventually takes you to the tooling for IETF: https://authors.ietf.org/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/authors.ietf.org/__;!!NpxR!gZuf46-4UZ4mooxwi0K8YWAuXmgUUE9-JW6cXeUGjRT-ynZAPBcye1g8vvqc94JvZJIXtHK5vXrUTA$>. Since the authors for the existing stats draft have uploaded their draft in XML format, you can grab that from the data tracker to start a new one. Prior WG discussion about the stats draft was that we eventually have a need to publish the current contents. Since the statistics type code points include a first come, first served option, the bar to creating new statistics - potentially including proprietary ones - is not high. However, most of the stats that will be of use to operators are ones that have the greatest benefit if they're discussed in an open standards setting. The current draft shows the first round of such a practice. Many authors contributed to the statistics and the working group provided review about the definition of those statistics. Once there's a proposal, the usual IETF practices for WG adoption, edits, and review happen. If you're looking for that level of introduction to IETF process, it's probably time to take that part off of the list. -- Jeff
_______________________________________________ GROW mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
