Subject: BFD statistics for BFD-MPLS sessions (fate of MIB)

From: Jeffrey Haas <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2014 14:47:51 -0500

Working Group,

One of the topics broached during our status update at IETF-91 was the fate
of the BFD MPLS MIB.  (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bfd-mpls-mib-04)

MIBs often don't get a lot of attention within IETF and there is often a
cyclic dependency issue for customer demand based on the publication of an
RFC, but no demand because there's no RFC.  

There is also the issue that while BFD for MPLS is obviously a popular
protocol and supported across multiple vendors, MIBs are being generally
supplanted by Yang.  However, existing operational infrastructure still
heavily depends on SNMP polling.

------8<---- cut here ---->8------

I would like to thus turn this into a different question:

Does your implementation provide statistics for connectivity issues in your
UI for BFD over MPLS sessions?

If so, please compare them to the performance counters in the MIB.

------8<---- cut here ---->8------

The MIB obviously covers additional information, but performance counters
are usually the primary motivator for the MIB.

Let's use these data points to discuss whether the WG will continue to spend
effort on the MIB.

-- Jeff

---

From: "Thomas D. Nadeau" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2014 14:52:40 -0500

Also, just to add to this discussion, there is a way to translate SMI/MIBs -> Yang. This is fairly straight-forward, especially for simple statistics. 

	--Tom

> On Nov 24, 2014:2:47 PM, at 2:47 PM, Jeffrey Haas <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Working Group,
>