Thank you Thank you for clarification on which WG should initiate the draft.
I will work with the PIM WG and engage BFD WG as necessary during Last Call. Gyan Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 18, 2019, at 12:43 PM, Jeffrey Haas <[email protected]> wrote: > > Gyan, > >> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 12:10:25AM -0400, Gyan Mishra wrote: >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pim-drlb-11 >> >> >> So the BFD PIM Draft would register the PIM protocol and in asynchronous >> mode with echo disabled we can achieve sub millisecond detection time and >> convergence during failover. >> >> So I do think we need a PIM BFD Draft. >> >> Since this falls between multiple WG but since BFD related this would be >> under the BFD WG. > > Generally, when we're talking about whether a draft that utilizes BFD > belongs in BFD or not, the deciding criteria is usually whether there's > changes to the BFD protocol itself. > > I believe in these cases we'd be making use of existing p2mp BFD procedures > rather than extending them. In that case, we'd normally suggest the work > live in the related protocol Working Group. > > Part of BFD's charter is to help review uses of BFD in such protocols, so > even if the work was happening in the related multicast working groups, the > chairs of those groups are welcome to request simultaneous review in BFD > during last call. > > -- Jeff
