[bcop] [BCOP-discuss] eBGP Configuration BCOP - Call for Volunteer SMEs

Thanks all.  This is really great!  I will make sure Francois and his
colleagues will be in the loop (see CC).

I guess there will be coordination between the NANOG, JANOG, and RIPE
BCOP activities (Chris, Jan, and others?).  It would be great to learn
from each other from different regions.

For the RIPE area, we need to make a plan, some time lines, people
involved, etc., such that we coordinate activities and monitor some
progress.  I will not contribute to the document though, that is up to
you, but I can help you out in facilitating the activities,
coordination, etc.  Just a helping hand.

Cheers,

-- Benno


On 22/05/14 11:31, Henrik Lund Kramshøj wrote:
> 
> On 22/05/2014, at 11.22, Karsten Thomann
> <karsten_thomann at linfre.de> wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I would also like to participate as much as my time allows.
> 
> +1
> 
> We are also a very small organization, so we can share a lot of our
> internal docs/templates without restrictions.
> 
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Henrik
> 
> 
>> 
>> Am 22.05.2014 08:13, schrieb Alex Saroyan:
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> Maybe I missed something, was busy to participate this Ripe
>>> meeting. Just want to express my will in participating to BGP
>>> BCOP.
>>> 
>>> Best Regards /Alex Saroyan
>>> 
>>> Chris Grundemann <cgrundemann at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Bill Armstrong
>>>> <wrarmstrong at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Thanks for the info Benno! With that also being a fledgling
>>>>> initiative, there is probably no harm in NANOG moving
>>>>> toward that same goal...Now, merging the documents and
>>>>> determining which best practice is in-fact BEST may become
>>>>> interesting, but that is a problem for the future.
>>>> Indeed!
>>>> 
>>>>> From my perspective: After NANOG 61 we should have a good
>>>>> grasp on who
>>>> all from this region is willing and able to participate. At
>>>> that time I suggest that we merge the interested NANOGers
>>>> with the interested RIPE'rs and form one BGP BCOP
>>>> cross-regional working group to build a single document which
>>>> we can both publish (or we can choose one place to publish if
>>>> that makes more sense)...
>>>> 
>>>> I note that the RIPE "IPv6 Helpdesk" BCOP is being written
>>>> using a similar model, with folks from both regions working
>>>> together to draft a single document.
>>>> 
>>>> $0.02 ~Chris
>>>> 
>>>>> Bill
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 3:37 PM, Benno Overeinder
>>>>> <benno at nlnetlabs.nl> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> With the last RIPE68 meeting, a BGP configuration BCOP
>>>>>> proposal was presented by Francios Contat, see 
>>>>>> https://ripe68.ripe.net/programme/meeting-plan/bcop-tf/.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> In the slides, Francios explained their approach: get
>>>>>> ISPs on board, definitions, scenarios, good practices,
>>>>>> etc. The presentation was a call for interest for others
>>>>>> to join. Next is to redefine goals, scope, etc., such 
>>>>>> that it will become a manageable document. Work to obtain
>>>>>> input, review, collect comments will take place in the
>>>>>> RIPE Routing Working Group.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The document already available is in French, but Google
>>>>>> translate does a good job to obtain an English version.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Benno Overeinder
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Op 21 mei 2014 om 17:35 heeft Bill Armstrong
>>>>>> <wrarmstrong at gmail.com> het volgende geschreven:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Ahoy There! Over the last few months the NANOG BCOP
>>>>>> committee has combed through the NANOG and various other
>>>>>> NOG/IETF-Ops mailing lists and have identified a stack
>>>>>> reoccurring or pressing questions and concerns which we
>>>>>> are using as seeds for our initial BCOP Appeals. One
>>>>>> exceptionally frequent line of questions tend to be
>>>>>> rooted in what amounts to "eBGP 101/102"(how to turn up 
>>>>>> and test a peer and potential pitfalls there-in). While
>>>>>> there is already a "Public Peering Exchange" BCOP and a
>>>>>> draft for "IPv6 Peering" is in the works, it appears that
>>>>>> the fundamentals need to be captured and put on display.
>>>>>> Although there are already a handful of SMEs on-board,
>>>>>> our goal is to define the BEST practices so the more
>>>>>> insight we can get into this problem the better! If you
>>>>>> are interested in acting as a SME for the "eBGP 
>>>>>> Configuration BCOP" please let me know, this is your
>>>>>> chance to sow your expertise across the internet!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> THANKS! Bill Armstrong
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> P.S. I'll be at NANOG 61 so if you aren't sure about the
>>>>>> commitment or have questions about the BCOP process don't
>>>>>> hesitate to track me down for a chat!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> BCOP mailing list BCOP at mailman.nanog.org 
>>>>>> http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/bcop
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________ BCOP
>>>>> mailing list BCOP at mailman.nanog.org 
>>>>> http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/bcop
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -- @ChrisGrundemann http://chrisgrundemann.com
>>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- Henrik Lund Kramshøj, Follower of the Great Way of Unix internet
> samurai cand.scient CISSP hlk at kramse.org hlk at solidonetworks.com +45
> 2026 6000 http://solidonetworks.com/ Network Security is a business
> enabler
> 


-- 
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/