BFD Auth authors, BFD WG, Ketan,
Thanks to the authors for addressing the comments which came from AD-review. I 
have gone through all 3 documents, concentrating on the changes made since WGLC 
completed, and the documents are all aligned with each other.
Here are some comments/questions (and a few small nits I noticed). 
draft-ietf-bfd-optimizing-authentication
Comments/questions:- Intro: "whereby only important BFD state transitions 
require strong authentication" (this seems to be new text). I thought all state 
transitions required strong authentication?- Terminology & Section 3.1: 
bfd.RequiredMinTxInterval -> bfd.DesiredMinTxInterval (I missed this in 
previous revs)- Section 3.1: "that do not require a poll sequence". Per 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5880#section-6.8.3 2nd paragraph, the 
examples given do require a poll sequence?
Nits:- Intro: "to authenticate BFD every packet" -> "to authenticate every BFD 
packet"- Section 3: "For example, MD5 and SHA1. (Section 6.7 of [RFC5880])" -> 
"For example, MD5 and SHA1 (Section 6.7 of [RFC5880])."
- Section 3: in the last paragraph should the trailing ":" be a "."? Or is the 
":" on purpose?- Section 7.1: "if the Auth Len field is not equal to a value 
appropriate for the" twice?


draft-ietf-bfd-secure-sequence-numbers
No comments.
Nits:- Introduction: "This specification therefore define" -> "This 
specification therefore defines"- Section 2: "and then define a" -> "and then 
defines a"- Section 3: "and is therefore is not suitable" -> "and is therefore 
not suitable"- Section 4.1 1st paragraph: "and the Opt. Mode field contains 2" 
-> "and the Optimized Authentication Mode field contains 2 (optimized)"- Repeat 
comment above for 1st paragraph of sections 4.2 and 4.3.

draft-ietf-bfd-stability
No comments or nits.
Regards,Reshad.
    On Friday, July 11, 2025 at 01:41:55 PM EDT, Reshad Rahman 
<[email protected]> wrote:  
 
  BFD WG,
The authors have updated the 3 documents based on AD feed-back from Ketan. 
Please provide any comments/feedback/approval/objections on the updated 
documents by July 18th.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfd-optimizing-authentication/




https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfd-secure-sequence-numbers/




https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfd-stability/




Regards,Reshad.

    On Tuesday, May 6, 2025 at 03:13:47 PM EDT, Rahman <[email protected]> 
wrote:  
 
 The WGLC has concluded and the shepherd write ups have been updated. The 
documents have been pushed to the next phase.
It’s not over yet but thanks to everyone who has helped to get the documents 
past this milestone. It’s been a loooong journey and there’s more work to be 
done to get to the finish line.
Regards,Reshad.    

Reply via email to