Hi Acee, AFAIK, there's at least one implementation of RFC 8562 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc8562/>, which is the type of p2mp BFD used in this draft. Also, I should note that the failure detection mechanism in RFC 9026 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9026/> Multicast VPN Fast Upstream Failover is RFC 8562 p2mp BFD.
Regards, Greg On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 3:22 AM Acee Lindem <acee.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Greg, > > Is P2MP BFD widely deployed or even implemented? I know FRR doesn't > support it. > > Also, prior to WG last call, can you provide the ietf-vrrp.yang > augmentations the draft that would be needed to support this feature (both > config and operational state)? > > Thanks, > Acee > > > On Mar 21, 2025, at 4:34 AM, Greg Mirsky <gregimir...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Dear All, > > As noted in the RTGWG meeting at IETF-122, two WG documents describe > BFD-based solutions in support of faster convergence in the VRRP > environment. Although both drafts use BFD mechanisms, these mechanisms are > significantly distinct, resulting in very different modifications to the > RFC 9568 VRRPv3 specification required by each solution. At some point in > the past, a single draft documents both solutions. Since the solutions > split, it seems that draft-ietf-rtgwg-vrrp-p2mp-bfd has evolved and is now > ready for the WG LC. Hence, the question to the WG: > > • Do you object to maintaining and publishing separate documents > that document BFD-based solutions in support of faster VRRP convergence? > > > > Regards, > > Greg > > _______________________________________________ > > rtgwg mailing list -- rtgwg@ietf.org > > To unsubscribe send an email to rtgwg-le...@ietf.org > >
_______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list -- rtgwg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to rtgwg-le...@ietf.org
