Hi John, > On 07 Feb 2019, at 21:06, John Scudder <j...@juniper.net> wrote: > > [ .. ] > >> Although not going in the ideal direction, for shorter-term I was thinking >> about somewhat a mix of the two solutions you propose, to work as a Charon: >> use a new reason code (or perhaps two, one for local terminated session, one >> for remotely terminated session) since, as you said in your follow-up email, >> it is the more conservative and would give the most hope against what has >> been already coded. And make this/these new reason code(s) carry "additional >> data [that] would be TLVized. It would obviously need to have a registry >> created for it” so not to make all too “expedient” and revolving around the >> specifics of VRF/Table Name and draft-ietf-grow-bmp-local-rib. > > If I understand you correctly this seems fine to me. I guess the easiest way > to be fully clear would be to rev the draft, and then we can have a look at > the new text?
I contributed some text in section 5.3 (and updated IANA considerations in section 8), see: https://github.com/TimEvens/draft-ietf-grow-bmp-loc-rib/blob/master/draft-ietf-grow-bmp-local-rib.txt Look forward to your thoughts. Paolo _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list GROW@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
