Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-bfd-vxlan-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-vxlan/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I support Ben’s DISCUSS. In addition, I have a number of editorial comments. General: there are a lot of missing or incorrect articles, making the document harder to read than it should be. It would be good to fix that. If you let the RFC Editor fix it, it will require careful review during AUTH48 to make sure it’s correct. — Abstract — The phrase “forming up” is odd; I suggest just “forming”. — Section 3 — BFD packets intended for a VTEP MUST NOT be forwarded to a VM as a VM may drop BFD packets leading to a false negative. This needs two commas: one before “as” and one before “leading”. And what does “leading to a false negative” mean here? I don’t understand. It is RECOMMENDED to allow addresses from the loopback range through a firewall only if it is used as the destination IP address in the inner IP header, and the destination UDP port is set to 3784 [RFC5881]. I THINK the antecedent for “it” is meant to be “addresses from the loopback range”, though because of the number mismatch it looks like the antecedent is “a firewall”. One fix is to change “addresses” to “an address”, correcting the number error, but that leaves the ambiguity. Maybe betterto make it “only if they are used as destination IP addresses”. Also, remove the comma. That fixes the sentence as written, but I also agree with Ben’s comment that this might need more significant rewording. — Section 4 — BFD packet MUST be encapsulated and sent to a remote VTEP as explained in this section. This needs to be either “A BFD packet” or “BFD packets” and “VTEPs”. The MAC address MAY be configured, or it MAY be learned via a control plane protocol. Are those the only two choices? As both “MAY” are optional, as written it allows for others. I suggest not using BCP 14 key words here, and instead saying, “The MAC address is either configured or learned via a control plane protocol.” This addresses the scenario when the inner IP destination address is of VXLAN gateway and there is a router in underlay which removes the VXLAN header, then it is possible to route the packet as VXLAN gateway address is routable address. This sentence is too fractured for me to make any sense of it, so I can’t suggest a fix. Please fix it. It looks like Ben made more sense of it than I could, so maybe his suggestion will work. — Section 5 — received VXLAN packet MUST follow the procedures described in Section 4.1 [RFC7348]. This needs to say “Section 4.1 of [RFC7348].”
