Jeff - could you work w/Nobo to get the word "historical" included in the MIB draft as a characterization of BFD version 0 ? For example, the following text could be added to the introduction: because the BFD version 0 protocol is primarily of historical interest by comparison to the widespread deployment of the BFD version 1 protocol. Thanks, --David > -----Original Message----- > From: Jeffrey Haas [mailto:jhaas@xxxxxxxx] > Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2014 10:58 AM > To: Black, David > Cc: Nobo Akiya (nobo); tnadeau@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Zafar Ali (zali); General Area > Review Team (gen-art@xxxxxxxx); rtg-bfd@xxxxxxxx; ietf@xxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-bfd-mib-18 > > On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 02:00:05AM -0400, Black, David wrote: > > With respect to the MIB, this concern is a nit, so I'm ok with going ahead > without > > making this change ... > > > > ... However ... > > > > Your WG chairs and AD should be concerned that this significant flaw in > > BFD version 0 (justifying a "SHOULD NOT use" recommendation) is > undocumented. > > And also un-RFCed. > > It was a "work in progress" that never fully saw the light of full > deployment. Vendors very quickly moved to version 1 which fixed a critical > issue in the state machine. If any version 0 survives, it's historical and > likely to be a source of operational agony rather than a useful feature. > > -- Jeff