TLV support for BMP Route Monitoring and Peer Down Messages
draft-lucente-bmp-tlv-00
| Document | Type | Replaced Internet-Draft (individual) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Last updated | 2019-07-01 | ||
| Replaced by | draft-ietf-grow-bmp-tlv | ||
| Stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats |
Expired & archived
plain text
pdf
html
bibtex
|
||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus Boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Replaced by draft-ietf-grow-bmp-tlv | |
| Telechat date | |||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) | ||
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-lucente-bmp-tlv-00.txt
Abstract
Most of the message types defined by the BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) do provision for optional trailing data; however Route Monitoring message (to provide a snapshot of the monitored Routing Information Base) and Peer Down message (to indicate that a peering session was terminated) do not. Supporting optional data in TLV format across all BMP message types allows for an homogeneous and extensible surface that would be useful for the most different use- cases that need to convey additional data to a BMP station. While this document does not want to cover any specific utilization scenario, it defines a simple way to support optional TLV data in all message types.
Authors
Paolo Lucente
(paolo@ntt.net)
Yunan Gu
(guyunan@huawei.com)
Henk Smit
(hhwsmit@xs4all.nl)
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)