I support adoption of this draft. Although many implementations have added strict mode support based only on local configuration, given that the adjacency state machine is altered it seems long overdue that protocol extensions be defined so there is more robust interoperability.
Les > -----Original Message----- > From: Lsr <lsr-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Christian Hopps > Sent: Friday, December 13, 2019 3:55 AM > To: lsr@ietf.org > Cc: lsr-...@ietf.org; Christian Hopps <cho...@chopps.org>; draft-ketant- > lsr-ospf-bfd-strict-m...@ietf.org > Subject: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call for draft-ketant-lsr-ospf-bfd-strict-mode > > Hi LSR WG and Draft Authors, > > This begins a 2 week WG adoption poll for the following draft: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ketant-lsr-ospf-bfd-strict-mode/ > > Please indicate your support or objection by Dec 27th. > > Authors, please respond indicating whether you are aware of any IPR that > applies to this draft. > > Thanks, > Chris & Acee. > _______________________________________________ > Lsr mailing list > Lsr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list Lsr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
