Jeff and Reshad,
I do not support adoption of either draft-tanmir-rtgwg-bfd-mc-lag-ip-01 or
draft-tanmir-rtgwg-bfd-mc-lag-mpls-01.
The overall problem and proposed solution did not seem to have received much
discussion. I was only able to find one email thread on the list, over a year
ago.
Regarding the problem statement, it’s strange that there’s no normative
definition or anything to MG-LAG… further, the meeting notes from IETF96 say
things like:
John Messenger: Would suggest work done in 802.1 to analyze those
considerations with 802, it would be necessary to coordinate to work
with them. Send a mail to IETF-IEEE802 coordination group.
Jeff Haas: Can we sign you as a reviewer to this draft?
What is the problem again, beyond what’s already well specified in RFC 7130? Is
this again a quick “solution” looking for an RFC number?
Regarding the proposed solution, the one email thread seems to have pointed out
some serious issues not considered:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-bfd/OLWLCf6dn-3zxGZboTKVqUwSr6w
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-bfd/nwfLfudDdNw7PyJbpP-RVnVFMcQ
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-bfd/EuRObko0JO40_4UPB4buR0iyxcg
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-bfd/QUb5rj882TKeAAXyTof4ycq2DUg
Additionally, why the split into two drafts for this? The text of both
documents overall seems forgotten, even sloppy, with many typos (“MPSL”,
“Indvidual”, etc), and copy/paste text between the two documents. The complete
Introduction and Problem Statement are verbatim copy/paste, and include things
like:
This document
proposes how to overcome this problem if using IP or Multi-Protocol
Label Switching (MPLS) data plane encapsulation.
which is not the case for either document.
Technically, using multicast here exercises a different path, and using a GAL
does as well. What are we testing?
Net-net, do not support.
Thanks,
— Carlos.
On Apr 17, 2017, at 6:55 PM, Jeffrey Haas
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Working Group,
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tanmir-rtgwg-bfd-mc-lag-ip-00
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-tanmir-rtgwg-bfd-mc-lag-mpls/
The authors of BFD on Multi-Chass Link Aggregation Group Interfaces for IP
and MPLS have requested BFD working group adoption for their drafts.
These drafts were previously presented at IETF-96.
Please note that IPR has been declare against these drafts. The IPR
declaration may be found from the datatracker links.
Please indicate your support/lack of support to the mailing list.
-- Jeff and Reshad
