On 15/10/2021 20:18, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
Working Group,
Now that the BFD YANG work is getting ready to pop out of the RFC Editor's
queue, it's an appropriate time to finish the last minor details for the
BFD Unsolicited draft.
Previously, the draft had exited Working Group Last Call with minor
Tom,
I have personally addressed most if not all of your comments.
Do you see in version -07 used "aligned" or "explicitely" ?
If something was not addressed it was based on the discussion with
co-authors.
Many thx,
R.
On Fri, Nov 26, 2021 at 1:27 PM t petch wrote:
> On 15/10/2021 20:18, Jef
[Largely for the WG mail list archive.]
> On Nov 26, 2021, at 7:26 AM, t petch wrote:
>
> On 15/10/2021 20:18, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
>> I encourage the Working Group to review the draft and the comments to date.
>> After resolving them, I believe we're ready to have a shepherd writeup and
>> send
I'll address the comment below on missing normative reference to 8349 and will
upload 08. I believe the other comments have been addressed in the copy in
github.
Regards,Reshad.
On Friday, November 26, 2021, 11:08:11 AM EST, Jeffrey Haas
wrote:
[Largely for the WG mail list archive.]
On 26/11/2021 14:20, Robert Raszuk wrote:
Tom,
I have personally addressed most if not all of your comments.
Do you see in version -07 used "aligned" or "explicitely" ?
If something was not addressed it was based on the discussion with
co-authors.
Robert
I cannot recall commenting on 'expli
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Bidirectional Forwarding Detection WG of the
IETF.
Title : Unsolicited BFD for Sessionless Applications
Authors : Enke Chen
On 26/11/2021 16:08, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
[Largely for the WG mail list archive.]
On Nov 26, 2021, at 7:26 AM, t petch wrote:
On 15/10/2021 20:18, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
I encourage the Working Group to review the draft and the comments to date.
After resolving them, I believe we're ready to hav
I just posted 08, it passed id-nits :-) Seriously, regarding the old reference
to bfd-yang it could be because 07 was posted before RFC9127?
Tom, this should address most (hopefully all) of the outstanding comments
you've provided from Aug 2020, Oct 2021 and Nov 2021. The Aug 2020 ones went
thr
