Hi Dhruv,
Thank you for the prompt feedback.
Please see inline.
Original
From: DhruvDhody <dhruv.ietf@xxxxxxxxx>
To: 肖敏10093570;
Cc: jhaas@xxxxxxxx <jhaas@xxxxxxxx>;gorry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <gorry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;last-call@xxxxxxxx <last-call@xxxxxxxx>;draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo.all@xxxxxxxx <draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo.all@xxxxxxxx>;rtg-bfd@xxxxxxxx <rtg-bfd@xxxxxxxx>;
Date: 2024年10月17日 16:32
Subject: [Last-Call] Re: UDP Guidelines and draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12
--
last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
Hi Xiao,
[XM]>>> I can add the reference to RFC 5082 back to this document, if no objection from Dhruv (who had that concern). Propose to change the text as below.
OLD
All Unaffiliated BFD Echo packets for the session MUST be sent with a Time to Live (TTL) or Hop Limit value of 255, and received with a TTL or Hop Limit value of 254, otherwise the received packets MUST be dropped.NEW
All Unaffiliated BFD Echo packets for the session MUST be sent with a Time to Live (TTL) or Hop Limit value of 255, and received with a TTL or Hop Limit value of 254, otherwise the received packets MUST be dropped ([RFC5082] Appendix A).END
Dhruv: I would have been happy with rephrasing the text in such a way that referencing 5082 made sense. Would this be better -
"All Unaffiliated BFD Echo packets for the session MUST be sent with a Time to Live (TTL) or Hop Limit value of 255. Received packets MUST have a TTL or Hop Limit value of 254 (similar to Appendix A of [RFC5082] to verify against a configured number of hops); otherwise, the received packets MUST be dropped."
[XM]>>> Yes, your text looks better to me. How about Jeff and Gorry?
Best Regards,
Xiao Min
Dhruv
Cheers,
Xiao Min
-- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
