Marc, On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 10:55:21PM -0800, Marc Binderberger wrote: > > [Jeff Haas]: BFD has been pretty stable for several years. We potentially > > can take BFD to full standard then. This needs to do errata, implementation > > reports, etc. Question to WG - do you think that BFD should be considered > > to be full standard? > > [Answer] > > 0 hands. > > [Jeff Haas] > > I will take the question to the mailing list. > > > Being a full standard, does this has any implications for BFD? Will there be > more IETF-hoops to jump through for future protocol work? Or is it more a > natural step for a stable "Proposed Standard" to be recognized as a Standard?
No additional hoops for future work. It is just recognition of stability. It should be noted that of all of the RFC series, there are less than 100 full standard document sets. But that said, part of the work of moving to full standard is taking care of any open issues in the specs. With regard to the based RFC 5880, this really covers two items: - Demand mode, no one implements this. - The M-bit, for multipoint. We're trying to get that implemented. :-) It's perhaps arguable that the fast authentication mechanism and the better cryptographic functionality drafts are part of the suite we'd want to take with us if we went to full standard. -- Jeff
