Hi Dave,

I’ve been quoted in the past that BGP, used as a transport, is “TCP with
> beard.”  It would have been trivial to split out the minimal semantics the
> actual BGP protocol brought to the table.
>

BGP just because "it is there already" now transports link state database
and one SAFI of it is being called a link state protocol. Just because it
is there regardless of its p2mp nature is also being used for p2p
configuration push including ACLs.

It seems that BFD is heading the same way - again on the very same basis -
"it is there" - so let's use it.


> Part of the issue is that the IETF hasn’t bothered to put together a set
> of generic transports to build things like this on top of.


Spot on !

Except IETF does not ship router's code :). Vendors do.  And till we see a
generic transport perhaps ZeroMQ message bus like OpenR uses being
shipped across at least few vendors existing protocols will get abused more
and more ...

Best,
R.
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

Reply via email to