Adding BBF Liaison officer David Sinicrope to the discussion. I have a question regarding the BBF's interest in this work. Had IETF and the BFD WG received an official liaison from BBF regarding its interest in standardizing the mechanism mentioned in TR-146? If not, how the BFD WG has concluded that BBF has any interest in that work?
Regards, Greg On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 6:29 AM Jeffrey Haas <jh...@pfrc.org> wrote: > I owe the commenters in this thread a detailed response in the near future. > However, I did want to highlight the underlying motivation the Working > Group > had to pick up this work. > > > On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 05:00:09PM +0800, xiao.m...@zte.com.cn wrote: > > As you may have known or not, before this draft was posted, we ever tried > > to submit an errata instead of an I-D. However, under the direction of > the > > responsible AD and WG chairs, we realized that an informational draft > > might be the proper way to record our implementation and deployment. And > > then, during the adoption poll of this draft, there was rough consensus > > that this draft should be adopted as standards track document, so we > > changed the intended status from informational to standards track. > > A core motivation for this work is to provide an IETF standardized profile > of what is typically shipped as Broadband Forum (BBF) TR-146. That > mechanism, effectively running a BFD-aware system with a system that does > NOT implement BFD but able to provide BFD Echo loopback mode. Arguably, > this is one step better than running ping and significantly better from a > monitoring standpoint since BFD machinery can be leveraged on the side that > supports it for creating events. > > TR-146 wasn't as clearly specified as we tend to like in IETF BFD work, so > we're doing a flavor of that here. > > Prior discussion with our AD of the time suggested that this is targeted > toward Standards Track. But like all IETF work, once we've completed the > draft, we may consider whether that classification remains correct. > > -- Jeff >
