2019/11/01 午後4:27、Greg Mirsky <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>のメール:
Hi Jeff, et al., 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. Also, would appreciate the opportunity to discuss the status of draft-mirsky-bfd-mpls-demand at the meeting. Is there a word for a recursive recurrent déjà vu? Kindly, Carlos. Regards, Greg On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 11:12 AM Jeffrey Haas <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Working Group, A session request had gone in for IETF 106 to accommodate the need for a possible session. The agenda, to this point, had been left as an open question primarily to accommodate need to close on lingering questions in active work. In particular, this was for two items: - BFD for vxlan - BFD for Large Packets (For transparency, I am an author on BFD for large packets) As of this afternoon, we seem to have drafts submitted that cover the known open issues on both of these drafts. In particular, the work to get us to the latest draft for the vxlan document took over 150 messages. If BFD meets, agenda time was primarily reserved to reconcile open issues on these documents. Discussion on BFDv2 is currently deferred for next IETF to focus the Working Group's limited attention on closing open work. That said, if we have other topics to consider, please submit them for consideration. If we have no such topics, and the discussion on the above two drafts seems likely to conclude well over e-mail, we may consider canceling the session. As a final note, since Reshad is unable to make it to IETF-106, if we do decide to continue with our meeting, we will require the commitment for a minutes taker. Reshad and I often will cover that for each other over the course of a session, but I won't be able to sustain that on my own. -- Jeff, for the chairs.
