Skip to main content

BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP)
draft-ietf-grow-bmp-17

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:

Announcement

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: "IETF-Announce" <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: grow-chairs@ietf.org, joelja@gmail.com, draft-ietf-grow-bmp@ietf.org, "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>, pds@lugs.com, grow@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Subject: Protocol Action: 'BGP Monitoring Protocol' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-grow-bmp-17.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'BGP Monitoring Protocol'
  (draft-ietf-grow-bmp-17.txt) as Proposed Standard

This document is the product of the Global Routing Operations Working
Group.

The IESG contact persons are Benoit Claise and Joel Jaeggli.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-grow-bmp/


Ballot Text

Technical Summary

This document defines a protocol, BMP, that can be used to monitor
BGP sessions.  BMP is intended to provide a convenient interface for
obtaining route views.  Prior to introduction of BMP, screen-scraping
was the most commonly-used approach to obtaining such views.  The
design goals are to keep BMP simple, useful, easily implemented, and
minimally service-affecting.  BMP is not suitable for use as a
routing protocol.

The BMP protocol provides access to the Adj-RIB-In of a peer on an
ongoing basis and a periodic dump of certain statistics the
monitoring station can use for further analysis.  From a high level,
BMP can be thought of as the result of multiplexing together the
messages received on the various monitored BGP sessions.

Working Group Summary

The BMP protocol has been a GROW document for quite sometime.  The
length of time has allowed the document to have multiple implementations
completed, along with incorporating working group feedback into the spec
and polishing the document.  There is strong support in the working group
and the community/industry for the protocol.  The work has been relatively
smooth, with active positive contribution from the community.

Document Quality

Because of the strong interest in the protocol, the document has been
actively reviewed by numerious people.  With the age of the document
at least two implementations have been completed in router software,
along with software for the monitoring station.

Personnel

Document Shepherd : Peter Schoenmaker <pds@lugs.com>
Responsible AD : Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>

RFC Editor Note