Hi Jeff, Version -07 of the draft addresses this comment. Thanks.
> On Oct 30, 2018, at 12:33 AM, Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanand...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Hi Jeff, > >> On Oct 29, 2018, at 9:10 AM, Jeffrey Haas <jh...@pfrc.org> wrote: >> >> Mahesh, >> >> On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 09:24:59PM -0700, Greg Mirsky wrote: >>> thank you for your quick response. The comment regarding the state change, >>> as I understand from the minutes, came from Jeff. >>> Yes, the question was about the periodic authentication in Up state. I >>> believe that at the meeting WG arrived at a very good solution and we've >>> agreed to make the appropriate changes in the document. I don't think that >>> the current version reflects the WG decision that in Up state authenticated >>> BFD control packets are transmitted periodically in sets of not less than >>> Detect Multiplier. >> >> I think the text is very close to what we'd likely want. Here's the text in >> the current draft: >> >> : Most frames transmitted on a BFD session are BFD CC UP frames. >> : Authenticating a small subset of these frames, for example, a detect >> : multiplier number of packets per configured period, significantly >> : reduces the computational demand for the system while maintaining >> : security of the session across the configured authentication periods. >> >> Given BFD procedures, I believe we'd normally want to transmit at *least* >> Detect Multiplier number of packets to ensure that the remote site has seen >> it. >> >> How about the following text? >> >> Most frames transmitted on a BFD session are BFD CC UP frames. >> Authenticating a small subset of these frames, significantly >> reduces the computational demand for the system while maintaining >> security of the session across the configured authentication periods. >> A minimum of Detect Multiplier packets MUST be transmitted per configured >> periodic authentication interval. This ensures that the BFD session should >> see at least one authenticated packet during that interval. > > Ok. Will update and post once the submission window opens up. > >> >> -- Jeff > > Mahesh Jethanandani > mjethanand...@gmail.com <mailto:mjethanand...@gmail.com> Mahesh Jethanandani mjethanand...@gmail.com
