Hi Carlos,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

IMHO, it may not be necessary to consider this LSP Ping based bootstrapping as 
normal LSP ping. And since both the ingress and egress LSR process the echo 
messages in the context of BFD session establishment, it should be no problem 
to process as described in RFC5884.

BTW, RFC5884 does not specify which reply mode will be used :)

Best regards,
Mach

From: Carlos Pignataro (cpignata) [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 6:58 AM
To: Reshad Rahman (rrahman)
Cc: Mach Chen; Ashesh Mishra; [email protected]
Subject: Re: A question about RFC5884

Hi,

I also agree with the conclusion of this thread in regards to what RFC 5884 
says. However, can that be in conflict with RFC 8029's procedures, in which the 
reply might be expected?
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8029#section-4.4

There is certainly no need to carry any information in an MPLS LSP Ping reply, 
since at that point the discriminatory are already carried in BFD. The reply 
might be important only if FEC validation fails.

I wonder though if the text of "The egress LSR MAY respond with an LSP Ping 
Echo" intended to convey that whether to reply or not depends on the value of 
the Reply Mode field in the Echo request.

Sent from my iPad

On Jul 16, 2017, at 6:22 PM, Reshad Rahman (rrahman) 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi,

My take too is that the RFC is pretty clear that Echo reply from egress
LSR is not mandatory.

Regards,
Reshad.



On 2017-07-16, 4:29 PM, "Rtg-bfd on behalf of Mach Chen"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> on behalf of 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:


Hi Ashesh,

Thanks for your prompt response, we're on the same page!

Best regards,
Mach

-----邮件原件-----
发件人: Ashesh Mishra [mailto:[email protected]]
发送时间: 2017年7月16日 22:26
收件人: Mach Chen
抄送: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
主题: Re: A question about RFC5884

That's how I read it ... assuming that proper handling of the LSR echo
includes
gracefully dropping it on rx.

Ashesh

On Jul 16, 2017, at 3:58 PM, Mach Chen 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Hi BFDers,

We met a multi-vendor interoperate issue recently, it's about whether
an Echo
reply is necessary.

In Section 6 of RFC5884, 2nd paragraph

"... The egress LSR MAY respond with an LSP Ping Echo
 reply message that carries the local discriminator assigned by it for
 the BFD session."

From the above text, my understanding is that an Echo reply is
optional, the
egress LSR can freely to return or not return an Echo reply, and the
Ingress LSR
should not expect there MUST be an Echo reply, but if there is one, it
should
handle it properly.

Is my understanding correct?

Thanks,
Mach


Reply via email to