Hi Saumya, All,
I think your proposal to make a "super draft" around statistics instead
of doing sparse efforts here and there - which for once they are sparse
but they are also difficult to track and put together in one framework -
has definitely some merit. The details can be worked out along the way.
I wanted to take this opportunity for a side consideration, this did
emerge actually from a recent conversation Camilo and myself had around
the F flag draft: we are collectively putting lots of effort and
attention to statistics in BMP but how important and, even more
importantly, how used are they? So, especially among operators / BMP
users reading, could we do something as basic as a show of hands (of
course the more elaboration the better) in this sense? Are you using
statistics? Yes/no? If into elaborating more: for what use-case(s), ie.
just storing them for analysis, some sort of validation, else?
Paolo
On 17/8/26 15:08, Dikshit, Saumya wrote:
Hello All ,
I would like feedback on a BMP statistics issue that appears to be
missing from the current discussion.
There are several ways to represent the same class of object in BMP
today: per-instance gauge values scoped by AFI/SAFI, RD, EVPN instance,
or route-change policy.
A collector that wants to support all of these may end up needing
multiple incompatible parsers for essentially the same operational concept.
This is already being discussed in parallel emails chains and this the
gap I am trying to address with the following drafts:
*
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saumthimma-evpn-ip-binding-
sync/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saumthimma-evpn-ip-
binding-sync/>
*
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dikshit-grow-bmp-rd-scoped-
rib-stats/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dikshit-grow-bmp-
rd-scoped-rib-stats/>
*
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-smc-grow-bmp-route-change-
stats/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-smc-grow-bmp-route-
change-stats/>
This is an ask for review comments on the direction:
*
whether a common instance-scoped / RD-scoped BMP statistics
structure is the right approach, and whether the statistics
ecosystem needs a shared pattern before these extensions proliferate.
I would especially value feedback from people working on:
- BMP statistics
- BMP data models
- EVPN and VPN RIB reporting
- route-change and policy-driven telemetry
If the WG thinks a common pattern is useful, I would be happy to align
the drafts around that structure.
If not, It would be great to know about it now, than discovering it later.
Thanks.
Saumya Dikshit
_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
