On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 02:45:54PM +, Alexander Vainshtein wrote:
> Albrecht, Reshad and all,
> I concur with Reshad - it will work (RFC 7130 never says anything about the
> number of links in the LAG).
A somewhat perverse use of the feature. Cute. :-)
> Such a session would still use encaps
Albrecht, Reshad and all,
I concur with Reshad - it will work (RFC 7130 never says anything about the
number of links in the LAG).
Such a session would still use encapsulation in IP/UDP with the UDP destination
port set to 6784 and the Destination IP address " that is configured on the
peer sys
Hi,
That should work. Are you referring to the encapsulation overhead?
Regards,
Reshad.
On 2019-06-12, 10:30 AM, "Rtg-bfd on behalf of Schwarz Albrecht (ETAS/ESY1)"
wrote:
Thanks again all for recommendations and background information.
With regards to RFC 7130:
> Bidirectio
Thanks again all for recommendations and background information.
With regards to RFC 7130:
> Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) on Link Aggregation Group (LAG)
> Interfaces
Actually, I was thinking about a group size of one ("whereas the normal LAG is
> 1") to emulate BFD over a single ph
Jeffrey,
Lots of thanks for a prompt response.
I tend to agree with your statement that " IETF doesn't have a useful OAM
model".
But I would add that, in spite of that, IETF has a rich set of OAM tools that
are widely deployed and serve the real needs of the IETF community reasonably
well, and
