Authors,
Quick note on both drafts. They do not indicate how the BFD state is
coordinated across the MC-LAG.
Node B
Node A |
Node C
If one member link between A and B fails, how is the info propagated to BFD
on node C?
Does the system rely on LACP?
Regards,
Ashesh
From: Rtg-bfd <[email protected]> on behalf of Gregory Mirsky
<[email protected]>
Date: Monday, April 4, 2016 at 7:31 PM
To: Jeffrey Haas <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]"
<[email protected]>, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "Alia Atlas
([email protected])" <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-LAG interfaces
Hi Jeff,
we have not expected this question that early J
Yes, there¹s IPR associated with these drafts that would be properly
disclosed after the meeting.
Regards,
Greg
From: Jeffrey Haas [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, April 04, 2016 3:23 PM
To: Gregory Mirsky
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; Alia Atlas ([email protected])
Subject: Re: Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-LAG interfaces
Working Group,
These documents reasonably extend the existing BFD on LAG mechanism and
would be reasonably in charter for BFD to pick up.
Greg, given that adoption seems a reasonable course, could you and the other
co-authors state whether there's any known IPR on these documents?
-- Jeff
> On Apr 4, 2016, at 7:16 PM, Gregory Mirsky <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
> Dear All,
>
> two new drafts, related to RFC 7130, were published before the meeting:
>
> · BFD on MC-LAG interfaces in IP network
> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tanmir-rtgwg-bfd-mc-lag-ip-00>
>
> · BFD on MC-LAG interfaces in IP/MPLS network
> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tanmir-rtgwg-bfd-mc-lag-mpls-00>
>
>
>
> Greatly appreciate your reviews, comments, questions and suggestions.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Greg
