Greg.
> On Nov 1, 2019, at 4:27 PM, Greg Mirsky <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think that it will be of interest to the group to get an update on the > draft-mirmin-bfd-extended. We've added details on the use of the Padding TLV. As noted previously, we will be deferring this work for next IETF. > Also, would appreciate the opportunity to discuss the status of > draft-mirsky-bfd-mpls-demand at the meeting. Our agenda is likely to be light, and a small amount of time can be reserved - say 10 minutes. However, there are strict requirements on the slides since we'd previously discussed this at IETF-105 and on-list: Your slides need to clearly demonstrate what you think is missing from RFC 5880 procedures. In particular, from our prior discussions: - 5880 describes entering and leaving demand mode. - Previous discussion clarified that a change of the status field is a reason to do a poll sequence to notify the remote end of the new status. (See text from concatenated paths mode 6.8.17 describing one such scenario.) We agreed that an errata could potentially be filed to clarify this document wide. So, we will need what exact protocol normative behavior is missing. -- Jeff
