--On fredag, januar 10, 2003 10:48:24 -0800 Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
wrote:
this bof proposal is really the start of replacing ptomaine with a new wg.
the difference at 10.000 feet seems to be that ptomaine says "the global
routing table is in trouble", while this one says "bgp is in trouble".
this makes iBGP in scope for BOPS, but out of scope for PTOMAINE.
I worry about the interactions between ptomaine, bops and idr. who gets to
specify extensions to bgp, and who does not?
if measurement has failed fatally in ptomaine, what's the reason to expect
it to succeed in bops?
Harald
bops goals:
The purpose of the BGP OPS WG is continue and expand on
the original charter of the PTOMAINE WG. In particular,
the purpose of the BOPS WG is to consider and measure the
problem of routing table growth, and where appropriate,
to document the operational aspects of measurement,
policy, security, and VPN infrastructures.
ptomaine goals:
1) To provide a clear definition of the problems facing Internet Routing
Scaling today. This includes routing table size and route processing load.
2) To provide a taxonomy to describe prefix information for peer review.
3) To collate measurements of routing table scaling data and publish a
reference list.
4) To discuss and document methods of filtering/aggregating prefix
information and to discuss and document what support from protocols or
vendor knobs that might be helpful in doing this. In addition, to suggest
policy guidelines to RIRs, LIRs and/or ISPs for allocations and
aggregations,etc. that may be useful.
5) To determine the long and short term effects of filtering/aggregating
prefixes to reduce router resource consumption.
6) To develop methods of controlling policy information propagation in
order to limit the need for propagation of prefix sub-aggregates.