RE: Couple comments on draft-ali-spring-bfd-sr-policy

2018-03-20 Thread Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
Hi Greg, Thanks for your review and comments. Please check inline below for responses. From: Greg Mirsky Sent: 20 March 2018 08:57 To: draft-ali-spring-bfd-sr-pol...@ietf.org; spring ; rtg-bfd@ietf.org Subject: Couple comments on draft-ali-spring-bfd-sr-policy Dear Authors, I've read the new

RE: Couple comments on draft-ali-spring-bfd-sr-policy

2018-03-21 Thread Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
and perhaps relevant to other signalled circuits and TE paths like RSVP-TE or MPLS-TP, but they do not seem appropriate for SR Policies to me. Thanks, Ketan From: Greg Mirsky Sent: 20 March 2018 16:58 To: Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) Cc: draft-ali-spring-bfd-sr-pol...@ietf.org; spring ; rtg-bfd

RE: Couple comments on draft-ali-spring-bfd-sr-policy

2018-03-21 Thread Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
, the authors of draft-ali-spring-bfd-sr-policy request that the analysis be done with SR architecture in mind and not just bringing in concepts from stateful and circuit oriented MPLS LSPs into SR Policies. Thanks, Ketan From: Greg Mirsky Sent: 21 March 2018 09:29 To: Ketan Talaulikar (ketant

FW: New Version Notification for draft-ketant-lsr-ospf-bfd-strict-mode-00.txt

2019-03-06 Thread Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
senak (ppsenak) ; Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) Subject: New Version Notification for draft-ketant-lsr-ospf-bfd-strict-mode-00.txt A new version of I-D, draft-ketant-lsr-ospf-bfd-strict-mode-00.txt has been successfully submitted by Ketan Talaulikar and posted to the IETF repository. Name:

RE: [Idr] draft-merciaz-idr-bgp-bfd-strict-mode

2019-07-25 Thread Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
Hi Albert, Thanks for your feedback from an operator perspective – it is valuable. This “BFD hold up” behaviour that you desire is best handled by BFD since I would expect that similar behaviour would be desired across routing protocols (OSPF, ISIS, BGP) and perhaps other clients. IMHO this is

RE: WGLC for draft-ietf-bfd-large-packets

2019-09-12 Thread Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
Hi All, I would like to ask some questions and seek clarifications on this draft. 1. I am aware that this draft originates from practical pain points at a specific operator. During the adoption calls, the scenarios were debated in detail. It was basically a L2 WAN circuit service over a pro

RE: Adoption call for draft-cw-bfd-unaffiliated-echo (ending 16 August, 2020)

2020-08-14 Thread Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
Hi All, I believe the WG should adopt this document since this is a very useful extension for BFD protocol in specific scenarios. While the document needs more details on the applicability, operational guidance and procedures, it does provide a very good starting point for the WG to address thi