Jeffrey,
If you and the authors are ambivalent to HL=255, then I would suggest to stick
to the original BFD spec and use HL=255
Regards
-éric
On 19/12/2019, 21:33, "iesg on behalf of Jeffrey Haas" <iesg-boun...@ietf.org
on behalf of jh...@pfrc.org> wrote:
See my prior ambivalence. :-) It's reasonable modulo one of the two prior
implementations saying "this is a big deal!" to say "for our purposes, we
wish to use the security considerations of 5881". As I noted for the IESG,
the considerations we have currently reflect 5884. And while your
explanation for 5884's situation was helpful, I'm not entirely clear why the
vxlan encapsulation is so entirely different with regard to its impact vs.
MPLS and thus the 5884 scenario.
