Excellent!

Many Thanks

Gyan
On Sun, Feb 13, 2022 at 3:19 PM Robert Raszuk <[email protected]> wrote:

> Gyan,
>
> The OSPF draft you quote does not make any assumptions nor restrictions on
> how BFD session itself is setup.
>
> So yes procedures described in draft-ietf-bfd-unsolicited could be used as
> a way to bring up BFD session between peers.
>
> Rgs,
> R.
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 13, 2022 at 9:05 PM Gyan Mishra <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Robert
>>
>> Would this BFD strict  mode apply to unsolicited BFD of which you are
>> author?
>>
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-bfd-unsolicited-03
>>
>> I think if applicable I think would be a good idea.
>>
>> Many Thanks
>>
>> Gyan
>> On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 10:59 AM Acee Lindem (acee) <acee=
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Robert,
>>>
>>> This is great to hear – I thought you wanted to make this required for
>>> implementation as opposed to a recommendation.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Acee
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From: *Robert Raszuk <[email protected]>
>>> *Date: *Thursday, February 10, 2022 at 10:57 AM
>>> *To: *Acee Lindem <[email protected]>
>>> *Cc: *"[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "
>>> [email protected]" <
>>> [email protected]>
>>> *Subject: *Re: [Lsr] Working Group Last Call for "OSPF Strict-Mode for
>>> BFD" - draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-bfd-strict-mode-04
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Acee,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > There was debate regarding making the delay timer described in section
>>> 5 a normative requirement.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I see added into new version of the draft the following text into
>>> section 5:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>    The use of OSPF BFD strict-
>>>    mode along with mechanisms such as hold-down
>>> *(a delay in the initial    OSPF adjacency bringup following BFD session
>>> establishment)* and/or
>>>    dampening
>>> *(a delay in the OSPF adjacency bringup following failure    detected by
>>> BFD)* may help reduce the frequency of adjacency flaps and
>>>    therefore reduce the associated routing churn.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Not sure if this is normative or informative, but it addresses my point.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thx,
>>>
>>> Robert.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 4:50 PM Acee Lindem (acee) <acee=
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> The WG last call has all but ended and we’ve had a lot of support, two
>>> implementations, and some good discussion. Please review the -05 version of
>>> the draft reflecting including changes reflecting this discussion. There
>>> was debate regarding making the delay timer described in section 5 a
>>> normative requirement. The consensus was to not make this a normative part
>>> of the specification. I feel this is the right decision – especially given
>>> that this is new functionality being requested at Working Group Last Call
>>> and implementations accomplish the dampening in vary ways.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-bfd-strict-mode/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Acee
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From: *Lsr <[email protected]> on behalf of "Acee Lindem (acee)"
>>> <[email protected]>
>>> *Date: *Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 12:09 PM
>>> *To: *"[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>>> *Cc: *"[email protected]" <
>>> [email protected]>
>>> *Subject: *[Lsr] Working Group Last Call for "OSPF Strict-Mode for BFD"
>>> - draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-bfd-strict-mode-04
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> LSR WG,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This begins a two week last call for the subject draft. Please indicate
>>> your support or objection on this list prior to 12:00 AM UTC on February 11
>>> th, 20222. Also, review comments are certainly welcome.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Acee
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lsr mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lsr mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
>>>
>> --
>>
>> <http://www.verizon.com/>
>>
>> *Gyan Mishra*
>>
>> *Network Solutions A**rchitect *
>>
>> *Email [email protected] <[email protected]>*
>>
>>
>>
>> *M 301 502-1347*
>>
>> --

<http://www.verizon.com/>

*Gyan Mishra*

*Network Solutions A**rchitect *

*Email [email protected] <[email protected]>*



*M 301 502-1347*
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr

Reply via email to