I have one minor additional tweak suggested to Greg's change. I think once we converge on this point, I'll do the document shepherd report and submit to the IESG.
> On Oct 18, 2021, at 8:47 PM, Greg Mirsky <gregimir...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Robert and the Authors, > thank you for your kind consideration of my comments and for addressing them > so thoughtfully. I have two editorial suggestions that can be used, if you > decide so, at a later date: > as the text refers to the format of a BFD control message, then it seems > appropriate to s/"Discriminator"/"My Discriminator" > Minor re-wording: > OLD TEXT: > When on the passive side Unsolicited BFD sessions goes down an > implementation MAY keep such session state for a configurable amount > of time. Temporarily keeping such local state may permit retrieving > additional operational information of such session which went down. > NEW TEXT: > When a session goes down on the passive side of an Unsolicited BFD, > an implementation MAY keep such a state for a configurable amount of > time. Temporarily keeping such a local state may permit retrieving > additional operational information of such session which went down. When an Unsolicted BFD session goes down, implementations MAY retain the session state for a period of time, which may be configurable. Retaining this state can be useful for operational purposes. -- Jeff
