On 12/8/15, 10:12 AM, "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <[email protected]>
wrote:

Hi!

>
>> On Dec 8, 2015, at 9:40 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>> 
>> On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 02:36:29PM +0000, Alvaro Retana (aretana) wrote:
>>> On 12/6/15, 4:09 AM, "Santosh P K" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Unless I missed something, Carlos [1] didn't reply to #1: how are the
>>>use
>>> cases satisfied?  I'm looking forward to an updated version of
>>> I-D.ietf-bfd-seamless-use-case which may help.
>> 
>> My understanding is that the use case draft is unlikely to proceed.
>>With
>> your blessing even.  How do you want the text here adjusted?
>
>How about:
>
>OLD:
>   This document
>   extends BFD to provide solutions to use cases listed in
>   [I-D.ietf-bfd-seamless-use-case].
>
>NEW:
>
><null>
>
>?

No.

I would prefer if the document said something about what problem it
solves.  Vs just extending BFD because we can.  Which is why I suggested
rewording I-D.ietf-bfd-seamless-use-case to be clear about what is
expected in each scenario [1] (but we got bogged down on my comments about
publication and paid no attention to what could be done to move
forward..even now that the WG has indicated that it doesn't mind if the
document is published..  <sigh>   But that is a different story.).

If I-D.ietf-bfd-seamless-use-case is updated, then we can keep the "OLD"
text above.  With the caveat that there are some use cases described there
for which it is not clear to me how this document applies.  My original
comments mentioned section 3.6. (BFD for Anycast Address) as an example.

If I-D.ietf-bfd-seamless-use-case is not updated, then I would like to see
a set of use cases included in this document as justification.  I suspect
that would be a sub-set of what is already there; one of my comments
related to I-D.ietf-bfd-seamless-use-case was that "not all the use cases
seem to add new requirements, they are just examples of different
instances of expressing the same need".

Thanks!

Alvaro.

[1] 
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-bfd/kin3Me4WrKbe9WljhkSfkKvsefA

Reply via email to