Hi Chairs, BFD community,
two drafts, draft-tanmir-rtgwg-bfd-mc-lag-ip and
draft-tanmir-rtgwg-bfd-mc-lag-mpls*, * were referred to BFD WG in BA that
clarify use of micro-BFD over MC-LAG interfaces in IP and IP/MPLS network
respectively. Authors would appreciate opportunity to present and discuss.

Regards, Greg

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Jeffrey Haas <[email protected]> wrote:

> IETF 96 will be convening in Berlin July 17-22.  BFD has not met recently,
> but our face to face meetings are driven by the need to advance work via
> in-person discussion.
>
> The chairs' perceived status of the Working Group is tracked on our wiki:
> https://wiki.tools.ietf.org/wg/bfd/trac/wiki
>
> Most of the recent WG attention has been spent on finishing IESG comments
> for S-BFD and we should hopefully be well on the way through the RFC Editor
> by the upcoming IETF, IESG telechat permitting.  Our active work includes:
>
> - BFD Yang module (please comment!)
> - BFD Multipoint (likely WGLC ready with at least one implementation for
> the
>   base document, and a trill use case for active tail).
> - Optimizing BFD Authentication - needs further discussion with security
>   minded IETFers.
>
> We also have BFD related documents targeted for other WGs where we should
> consider providing comment, if needed:
>
> - BFD Directed Return Path (in MPLS), stalled.
> - draft-ietf-trill-p2mp-bfd
> - draft-nitish-vrrp-bfd
> - draft-spallagatti-bfd-vxlan (possibly BFD, possibly NVO3)
>
> And several other WG documents that are chartered but stalled (or dead?)
>
> If you believe you have an agenda item that's cause for the Working Group
> to
> meet, please respond to this thread.
>
> -- Jeff and Reshad
>
>

Reply via email to