Hi Stewart, Jeffrey and other authors, If the purpose of this draft is not to deprecate the original VCCV BFD (0x10) function for MPLS PW, please make it clear: - One option is clearly removing MPLS/PW-ACH Encapsulation from SBFD so that BFD and SBFD complement with each other. - Another option is as the document describes, the same MPLS/PW is supported by both SBFD and original BFD, then a guideline section is needed so that consistent BFD type (SBFD or original BFD) can be chosen by the peer PEs (e.g., both BFD types are supported by two PEs associated with a specific BFD session).
Regards, Yuanlong -----Original Message----- From: Pals [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Vengada Prasad Govindan (venggovi) Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 12:53 AM To: [email protected]; [email protected] Cc: Jeffrey Haas <[email protected]> ([email protected]); Carlos Pignataro (cpignata); [email protected]; [email protected]; Stewart Bryant (stbryant) Subject: [Pals] Requesting comments on SBFD-VCCV drafts Hello all, We have submitted two new drafts: a. draft-gp-pals-seamless-vccv: This draft defines the SBFD protocol operation for VCCV. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gp-pals-seamless-vccv/ b. draft-gp-l2tpext-sbfd-discriminator: This draft defines AVPs for advertisement of SBFD discriminators in L2TP. We welcome comments/ feedback on these drafts. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gp-l2tpext-sbfd-discriminator/ Thanks Prasad
