BGP MIB v2 input

Susan Hares writes:
> Working group:
> Simon Leinen and Pekka Savola indicated the current MIB
is not
> sufficient,

For reference, the current MIB is now RFC 4273, which is
almost
identical to the venerable RFC 1657.  The "MIBv2"
I-D has expired (not
for the first time), but can be retrieved from:
    http://tools.ietf.org/wg/idr/draft-ietf-idr-bgp4-mibv2/

> And that portions of BGP MIBv2 that allow operators to
see the:

> -       amount of prefixes received, and
> -       amount of prefixes filtered.

Pekka raised these, and as an operator, I would also find
them quite
useful for monitoring peerings' sanity (peer going berserk?)
and
evolution (when it might be time for me to update filters,
max-prefixes, get rid of the peering because it has become
insignificant etc.)

They are available in MIBv2 as
"bgpM2PrefixInPrefixes" (number of
prefixes currently received from a peer for an address
family), and
"bgpM2PrefixInPrefixesAccepted/bgpM2PrefixInPrefixesRej
ected",
respectively.  It seems to me that these three variables are
slightly
redundant (although as an operator, I should probably like
redundancy
, as
...InPrefixes = ...InPrefixesAccepted +
...InPrefixesRejected.

(I asked a MIB doctor who happened to be sitting next to me,
and he
said it would be better to avoid this kind of redundancy in
a MIB.)

> Please send what in BGP MIB v2 is useful to you.

Definitely useful:

Everything that's under bgpM2PrefixCountersTable (except one
of the
three objects mentioned above, to remove the redundancy).

I especially like the fact that this table (and all others)
allow
peerings over IPv6 to be monitoring.  We cannot currently do
this in
our network, and that is a pain.

> The BGP MIB v2 has been in limbo for 5 years due to
lack of feedback. 

> We would like to encourage feedback from operators who
actually use
> these variables. 

We cannot use them since they don't exist, but we would use
them
almost instantly if we had software that supported them,
even in
vendor-specific variants.

> Please send what variables you use to the list.
-- 
Simon.

_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
Idrietf.org
https://ww
w1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr

Simon and others:

Simon Leinen wrote:
> Susan Hares writes:
>> Working group:

>> Please send what in BGP MIB v2 is useful to you.

It supports 32 bit AS Numbers, the current MIB doesn't as it
says:


  bgpPathAttrASPAth OBJECT-TYPE
    SYNTAX OCTET STRING (SIZE (2..255))
    [...]
    EAch AS is represented as a pair of octets according to
the following
    algorithm:
      first-byte-of-pair = ASNumber / 256
      second-byte-of-pair = ASNumber & 255;

  [...]

   bgpPeerRemoteAs OBJECT-TYPE
     SYNTAX  Integer32 (0...65535)

Either one will fail for AS1.0 and everything beyond that. 
The new draft has
an AS type that fixes this.

Henk


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------
Henk Uijterwaal                           Email:
henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net
RIPE Network Coordination Centre          http://www.amsterda
mned.org/~henk
P.O.Box 10096          Singel 258         Phone:
+31.20.5354414
1001 EB Amsterdam      1016 AB Amsterdam  Fax:
+31.20.5354445
The Netherlands        The Netherlands    Mobile:
+31.6.55861746
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------

# Lawyer: "Now sir, I'm sure you are an intelligent and
honest man--"
# Witness: "Thank you. If I weren't under oath, I'd
return the compliment."


_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
Idrietf.org
https://ww
w1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr