Re: BGP OPS BOF laugh test

[Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>]

>> 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?

the ptomaine wg would be closed if this was opened as a wg. 

as to idr, this was meant to be how to operate bgp as specified,
and maybe to generate requests for changes.  i do not think it is
meant to do protocol work itself.

> if measurement has failed fatally in ptomaine, what's the reason
> to expect it to succeed in bops?

measurement has not failed in ptomaine.  wg management has.

randy