Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-bfd-multipoint-active-tail-09: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfd-multipoint-active-tail/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) I guess it makes sense to have section 6.2 before 6.1 as MultipointClient is discussed in 6.1 but introduced in 6.2 currently. 2) sec 6.8 and 6.10 and later on: s/Required Min Rx Interval/bfd.RequiredMinRxInterval/ ? 3) sec 6.9: "The decision as to when to send a multipoint Poll is outside the scope of this specification. However, it must never be sent more often than the regular multipoint BFD Control packet." I think the doc should say more as when to send a poll. Also this should be an upper case MUST. However, even sending it as often as the regular packets would double the load and is therefore not desirable. I would like to see even stricter requirements here. 4) In sec 6.10: "This value can potentially be set much lower than in the multipoint case, in order to speed up a notification to the head, since the value will be used only by the single tail. This value (and the lack of delay) are "sticky", in that once the tail receives it, it will continue to use it indefinitely. " Given this value cannot be changed after initial sending, I would like to see a minimum value of 1 sec to be specified. 5) 6.12: "If the MultipointHead session is going down (which only happens administratively), all associated MultipointClient sessions SHOULD be destroyed as they are superfluous." Not sure I understand why this requirement is normative. Also how does tail know that the head was shut down (compared to connectivity is broken)...?
