[Last-Call] Re: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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:
- First it references 5880 for the base definition of BFD
- Then is describes two operational modes for BFD
   - Full BFD protocol capability with adjunct Echo function.
   - BFD Echo-Only method without full BFD protocol capability.
  5800 describes these as "asynchronous mode with echo function"
  and "demand mode with echo function"
- Finally, it defines terms affiliated and unaffiliated, via...
   The former scenario is referred to as affiliated BFD Echo, which is
   not changed by this document in any way.  The latter scenario is
   referred to as Unaffiliated BFD Echo, which is specified in this
   document.

Perhaps the solution is to change this to:
   The former scenario is referred to in this document as affiliated
   BFD Echo, and is not changed by this document in any way.  We
   refer to the latter scenario as Unaffiliated BFD Echo, and that is
   specified in this document.

Cheers,
Adrian

-- 
last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux