Following on from the Q&As and hallway chats at IETF102, I've captured a few questions for further discussion on the lists. For those yet to review the draft, it can be found here: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-patterson-intarea-ipoe-health-04
- BFD Echo: Still requires a full BFD implementation. Do we continue to specify BFD Echo specifically, as per TR-146, or do we rather specify a new "loopback" packet format to perform the same function, without full BFD. - Complexity: Do we need to define all 4 Behaviours? Would it help with adoption if we remove the Renew and Rebind behaviours, and focus on the latter 2 behaviours that are more likely to facilitate session re-establishment? (Perhaps combine behaviours 0,1,2 in to a converged method? i.e., attempt a single renew, and rebind before moving to solicit/discover) - Complexity2: Do we need to define 3 different health check methods? BFD Echo-style, ARP/ND, and Passive. I think that BFD Echo-style and active ARP/ND checks are both worthwhile specify, but dropping passive checks for simplicity is probably a good idea. - Engage Vendors: Current behaviour of silently discarding of Renew messages is seen as a violation of RFC2131. I agree that vendors could implement authentication on Renews, with additional complexity of validating current and pass lease-state. It doesn't entirely mitigate the problem, but would expedite client recovery somewhat. - Engage Broadband Forum: Discuss the problem and current limitations with their recommendations in TR-146, perhaps help drive a Broadband Forum equivalent of a -bis. I think engaging BBF is a good thing to happen anyway, but there are additional features of this draft, such as configurability and signalling of parameters via the DHCP option, and alternative behaviours. Do people think that these additional features warrant progressing this draft or something similar within the IETF, or should focus be shifted to working with the BBF on simply amending their TR-146? -Richard _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
