Reshad, Thanks again. I will address these comments. Thanks Santosh P K
On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 8:13 AM Reshad Rahman (rrahman) <rrah...@cisco.com> wrote: > Hi Santosh, > > > > Thanks for addressing the comments. > > > > General: NULL authentication TLV is still used, should be replaced with > NULL authentication type or section as appropriate. > > Be consistent for Null v/s NULL (NULL Auth is used in > bfd-optimizing-authentication) > > > > Introduction > > s/detect lost packet/detect lost packets/ > > > > Section 3 Use Cases: > > s/any BFD packet loss if loss/any BFD packet loss if the loss/ > > s/BFD implementation/BFD implementations/ > > Where the text says “failure of a link”, might be better to say “failure > of a datapath”? > > Informative references to CFM and TWAMP would be useful > > > > Section 4 > > “by appending the Null-Authentication type “. Suggest “by appending an > authentication section with the NULL Authentication type “ > > > > Section 5 > > “BFD uses authentication TLV”, suggest change to “BFD uses an > authentication section”. > > > > “BFD packets MUST include NULL-Auth TLV”. Change to “BFD control packets > MUST include an authentication section with the NULL Authentication type” > > > > Section 5.1 > > > > “The first BFD NULL-Auth type processed by the receiver…”. Change to “The > first BFD authentication section with the NULL Authentication type, in a > valid BFD control packet, processed by the receiver” . > > Also, does it have to be NULL Auth, I believe it can be any auth with > sequence number? If that’s the case change to “The first BFD authentication > section with a non-zero sequence number, in a valid BFD control packet, > processed by the receiver is used for….”. > > > > Regards, > > Reshad. > > > > *From: *Rtg-bfd <rtg-bfd-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of Santosh P K < > santosh.pallaga...@gmail.com> > *Date: *Sunday, July 19, 2020 at 4:06 PM > *To: *"rtg-bfd@ietf.org" <rtg-bfd@ietf.org> > *Subject: *Fwd: New Version Notification for > draft-ietf-bfd-stability-06.txt > > > > Hello All, > > A new version of draft for BFD-stablity is here for review. Changes > include addressing shepherd comments as provided here. > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfd-stability/shepherdwriteup/. > Please also see attached diff. > > > > Thanks > > Santosh P K > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: <internet-dra...@ietf.org> > Date: Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 4:41 PM > Subject: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-bfd-stability-06.txt > To: Mach Chen <mach.c...@huawei.com>, Ankur Saxena <ankurpsax...@gmail.com>, > Peng Fan <fan...@gmail.com>, Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanand...@gmail.com>, > Ashesh Mishra <mishra.ash...@gmail.com>, Santosh Pallagatti < > santosh.pallaga...@gmail.com> > > > > > A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-bfd-stability-06.txt > has been successfully submitted by Santosh Pallagatti and posted to the > IETF repository. > > Name: draft-ietf-bfd-stability > Revision: 06 > Title: BFD Stability > Document date: 2020-07-13 > Group: bfd > Pages: 6 > URL: > https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-bfd-stability-06.txt > Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfd-stability/ > Htmlized: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bfd-stability-06 > Htmlized: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-bfd-stability > Diff: > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-bfd-stability-06 > > Abstract: > This document describes extensions to the Bidirectional Forwarding > Detection (BFD) protocol to measure BFD stability. Specifically, it > describes a mechanism for detection of BFD packet loss. > > > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of > submission > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > The IETF Secretariat > >
