On Sun, Feb 27, 2022 at 04:24:35PM +0000, Reshad Rahman wrote: > > On Sunday, February 20, 2022, 05:09:22 PM EST, Greg Mirsky > > <gregimir...@gmail.com> wrote: > > - The document uses the normative language and is on the Standard track. > > At the same time, the behavior of the passive BFD system is entirely local > > and has no impact on the active BFD system. It appears like the use of > > normative language describing the implementation of the passive BFD system > > is unnecessary. It appears that the Informational track is more appropriate > > for this specification. > <RR> This was debated extensively ~15 months ago. I'll defer to Jeff H and > John S, but the last email I have on this is the following: > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-bfd/vOMZl9ucZwNKu5_MHHti-4ImOjQ/#
We'll stick with Proposed Standard for the time being based on conversation to date. I expect that we'll get similar discussion yet again once this hits IESG review. End of the day, we'll take whatever gets the document published. :-) -- Jeff
