Re: Alternate AD review of draft-ietf-bfd-large-packets-11

Jeff and other authors, Thanks for your patience on this one. Except for the point below EVY2>, all is clear and good to go. Thank you, Reshad, for the updated shepherd’s write-up. Please fix at least the EVY2> about the SHOULD (and think about my suggestion for the security section), then I w

Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12: (with COMMENT)

Murray Kucherawy has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please

John Scudder's No Objection on draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12: (with COMMENT)

John Scudder has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refe

Re: Roman Danyliw's Discuss on draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

What Jeff said. Roman, if you’ll take a marker for an update that covers this document, ex post facto, I'll commit to handling that as part of the charter update Jeff mentions. —John > On Oct 16, 2024, at 10:24 AM, Jeffrey Haas wrote: > > Roman, > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 06:24:10AM -0700,

Re: Mahesh Jethanandani's No Objection on draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12: (with COMMENT)

Mahesh, > On Oct 16, 2024, at 7:23 PM, Mahesh Jethanandani > wrote: > >> On Oct 16, 2024, at 12:15 PM, Jeffrey Haas > > wrote: >> >> Mahesh, >> >> >>> On Oct 16, 2024, at 2:41 PM, Mahesh Jethanandani >> > wrote: It specifies the us

Re: Mahesh Jethanandani's No Objection on draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12: (with COMMENT)

Hi Jeff. > On Oct 16, 2024, at 12:15 PM, Jeffrey Haas wrote: > > Mahesh, > > >> On Oct 16, 2024, at 2:41 PM, Mahesh Jethanandani > > wrote: >>> It specifies the use of the Unaffiliated BFD Echo over >>>IPv4 and IPv6 for a single IP hop. The reason why it ca

Re: Alternate AD review of draft-ietf-bfd-large-packets-11

Thanks, Reshad. Éric, I think this means all outstanding items are addressed and we can progress the document to the next step? -- Jeff > On Oct 15, 2024, at 11:17 AM, Reshad Rahman wrote: > > Eric, Jeff, > > > On Friday, October 11, 2024 at 12:00:39 PM EDT, Jeffrey Haas > wrote: > > >

Re: Mahesh Jethanandani's No Objection on draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12: (with COMMENT)

Mahesh, > On Oct 16, 2024, at 2:41 PM, Mahesh Jethanandani > wrote: >> It specifies the use of the Unaffiliated BFD Echo over >>IPv4 and IPv6 for a single IP hop. The reason why it cannot be used for >> multihop paths is that the Unaffiliated BFD Echo packets would be looped >> back by t

Re: [Last-Call] Tsvart telechat review of draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12

Brian, > On Oct 16, 2024, at 3:05 PM, Brian Trammell (IETF) wrote: > Okay, I get it now. > > That’s *weird*, or certainly weird enough to my layer-4-addled brain that I > didn’t get it on my admittedly relatively quick pass through 5880, and it > still fits fairly uncomfortably in my worldvi

Re: [Last-Call] Tsvart telechat review of draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12

hi Erik, Thanks for this message, I think we can finally conclude this thread; see in line below. > On 16 Oct 2024, at 20:34, Erik Auerswald wrote: > > Hi Brian, > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 07:39:15PM +0200, Brian Trammell (IETF) wrote: >>> On 16 Oct 2024, at 18:54, Erik Auerswald wrote: >>

Re: Mahesh Jethanandani's No Objection on draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12: (with COMMENT)

Hi Xiao, Thanks for addressing most of my comments. Just a couple of followup question. See inline with [mj] > On Oct 15, 2024, at 8:03 PM, > wrote: > > Hi Mahesh, > > > Thanks for your review and comments. > Please see inline. > > Original > From: MaheshJethanandaniviaDatatracker

Re: [Last-Call] Tsvart telechat review of draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12

Hi Brian, On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 07:39:15PM +0200, Brian Trammell (IETF) wrote: > > On 16 Oct 2024, at 18:54, Erik Auerswald wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 12:28:46PM -0400, Jeffrey Haas wrote: > >>> On Oct 16, 2024, at 1:31 AM, Brian Trammell (IETF) > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> Thanks for th

Re: [Last-Call] Tsvart telechat review of draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12

Brian, > On Oct 16, 2024, at 1:39 PM, Brian Trammell (IETF) wrote: >> On 16 Oct 2024, at 18:54, Erik Auerswald wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 12:28:46PM -0400, Jeffrey Haas wrote: >> Every described abuse scenario that works with Unaffiliated BFD Echo also >> works without it. The abuse is

Re: [Last-Call] Tsvart telechat review of draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12

hi Erik, > On 16 Oct 2024, at 18:54, Erik Auerswald wrote: > > Hi all, > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 12:28:46PM -0400, Jeffrey Haas wrote: >>> On Oct 16, 2024, at 1:31 AM, Brian Trammell (IETF) wrote: >>> >>> Thanks for the clarifications. Xiao, please take this reply as a >>> reply to your own

Re: [Last-Call] Tsvart telechat review of draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12

Hi all, On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 12:28:46PM -0400, Jeffrey Haas wrote: > > On Oct 16, 2024, at 1:31 AM, Brian Trammell (IETF) wrote: > > > > Thanks for the clarifications. Xiao, please take this reply as a > > reply to your own request for an amendment to this review; tl;dr the > > recommendation

Re: [Last-Call] Tsvart telechat review of draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12

Brian, > On Oct 16, 2024, at 1:31 AM, Brian Trammell (IETF) wrote: > > hi Erik, > > Thanks for the clarifications. Xiao, please take this reply as a reply to > your own request for an amendment to this review; tl;dr the recommendations > to the authors, WG, and IESG change in their details b

Re: UDP Guidelines and draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12

Gorry, > On Oct 16, 2024, at 3:02 AM, Gorry Fairhurst wrote: > > On 15/10/2024 22:11, Jeffrey Haas wrote: >> Gorry, >> >> On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 05:26:04PM +0100, Gorry Fairhurst wrote: >>> I have a few comments, but i am not a routing expert, so I'm maybe >>> misisng context on the intended

Re: Roman Danyliw's Discuss on draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Roman, On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 06:24:10AM -0700, Roman Danyliw via Datatracker wrote: > -- > DISCUSS: > -- > > (For the BFD WG chairs and responsible AD) This do

Roman Danyliw's Discuss on draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12: Discuss When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to

Re: UDP Guidelines and draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12

On 15/10/2024 22:11, Jeffrey Haas wrote: Gorry, On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 05:26:04PM +0100, Gorry Fairhurst wrote: I have a few comments, but i am not a routing expert, so I'm maybe misisng context on the intended use, and why this is a good thing to allow I did not find a description of why