Hi Reshad, > On Jun 13, 2024, at 12:24 PM, Reshad Rahman <[email protected]> wrote: > > Here are my comments for draft-ietf-bfd-stability. > > > Regarding the thread with Christian for the SecDir review > <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-bfd/y-Fwy40EbSQjnovIhMj1Bki69jo/>, > I wouldn't want a ban on NULL auth but we should consider his suggestion > <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-bfd/SzKGVXZ8xnVLdgB0Kfk6yhDV3so/> > of using it in certain environments only. > > Section 7 (YANG module) > > - In RFC9314, all packet counts for session statistics are counter64. > Change lost-packet-count to also use counter64?
Done. > > - The "stability" read-write leaf node is conditional on the feature > "stability" but the read-only lost-packet-count node is not conditional on > that feature despite the description saying "the counter should be present > only if stability is configured" (nit: should that be "... if stability is > enabled"?). So lost-packet-count by transitivity can only be present if > stability feature is enabled, but might be good to have an explicit > if-feature? Added if-feature statement. > > Section 9.1 > > - Worth mentioning, as already stated in 6.2, that OOO packets can > incorrectly be represented as lost packets? Done. > > - Nit: "a read-only variables" -> "read-only nodes"? Done. > > > Regards, > Reshad. > > > > > > On Monday, June 3, 2024, 09:30:18 PM EDT, Reshad Rahman > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > BFD WG, > > This email starts a 2 week Working Group Last Call for the following 3 > documents, please review and provide comments by end of day on June 17th. > Feedback such as "I believe the document is ready to advance" is also welcome. > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfd-secure-sequence-numbers/ > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfd-secure-sequence-numbers/> > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfd-optimizing-authentication/ > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfd-optimizing-authentication/> > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfd-stability/ > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfd-stability/> > > > Those documents were discussed extensively a few years ago but there have > been a few changes since (e.g. use of ISAAC). > > IPR check was done a few years ago but it's been a while and there has been > significant changes in the documents since then: > 1- Authors, please respond whether you are aware of any undisclosed IPR. > 2- Mahesh, Ankur and Ashesh, is this IPR > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/3328/> still relevant/applicable to > draft-ietf-bfd-optimizing-authentication? > > > Regards, > Reshad. > > > > Mahesh Jethanandani [email protected]
