Thanks a lot to Jeff for this comment.
The MPLS chairs have discussed this, and we are in agreement that this work
should be taken to BFD. BFD will then work out whether it needs to be taken as
a separate draft or folded into a revision of 5884.
Thanks to the authors for their work, and h
Hi all,
Since Loa quotes me extensively from a thread about a completely different
draft, perhaps I had better state my opinion on this draft.
I hate to be standing in the way of progressing work that it is a clear a number
of people want to see move forward, but I find the IPR disclosure against
draft-nitish-vrrp-bfd-04
RTGWG,
At this point, I don't think that there is a consensus for the working group to
adopt this draft
without more discussion of the issue raised by Loa Andersson and Adrian Farrel
in the
following two emails.
https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtg
Hi Gyan,
> Major issues:
>
> I don’t see affiliated or unaffiliated BFD defined in RFC 5880. I recommend
> correlation of the concept with a section and verbiage in RFC 5880.
I wondered about this a bit when I did a RTGDir review.
In the end, I decided that Section 1 had this covered as follows:
s been deployed for
years and implemented in multiple chipsets.
-- Jeff
On Oct 17, 2024, at 3:33 PM, Adrian Farrel mailto:adr...@olddog.co.uk> > wrote:
Jeff,
I think this is “almost there.”
Just need to say how the receiver of a reflected message ensures that the
packet is a sin
Jeff,
I think this is “almost there.”
Just need to say how the receiver of a reflected message ensures that the
packet is a single hop packet.
That probably comes down to…
TTL MUST be greater than or equal to n (254?). All other packets MUST be
discarded, but MAY be logged applying a rate
Hi all,
Thanks to Greg for calling out
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bonica-gendispatch-exp/
I would say that that draft does not “analyse and clarify conditions for an
IETF Experiment”. It’s purpose is to help guide authors of IETF Protocol
Experiments in what they should put i
Reviewer: Adrian Farrel
Review result: Has Issues
Hello,
I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. The
Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related drafts as
they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes on special
request
