> On 17 Oct 2024, at 09:45, [email protected] wrote: > > > Hi Dhruv, > > > > Thank you for the prompt feedback. > Please see inline. > > Original > From: DhruvDhody <[email protected]> > To: 肖敏10093570; > Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>;[email protected] > <[email protected]>;[email protected] > <[email protected]>;[email protected] > <[email protected]>;[email protected] > <[email protected]>; > Date: 2024年10月17日 16:32 > Subject: [Last-Call] Re: UDP Guidelines and > draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12 > -- > last-call mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > Hi Xiao, >> >> [XM]>>> I can add the reference to RFC 5082 back to this document, if no >> objection from Dhruv (who had that concern). Propose to change the text as >> below. >> >> OLD >> >> All Unaffiliated BFD Echo packets for the session MUST be sent with a >> Time to Live (TTL) or Hop Limit value of 255, and received with a TTL or >> Hop Limit value of 254, otherwise the received packets MUST be dropped. >> NEW >> >> All Unaffiliated BFD Echo packets for the session MUST be sent with a >> Time to Live (TTL) or Hop Limit value of 255, and received with a TTL or >> Hop Limit value of 254, otherwise the received packets MUST be dropped >> ([RFC5082] Appendix A). >> END >> >> >> > Dhruv: I would have been happy with rephrasing the text in such a way that > referencing 5082 made sense. Would this be better - > >> "All Unaffiliated BFD Echo packets for the session MUST be sent with a Time >> to Live (TTL) or Hop Limit value of 255. Received packets MUST have a TTL or >> Hop Limit value of 254 (similar to Appendix A of [RFC5082] to verify against >> a configured number of hops); otherwise, the received packets MUST be >> dropped." > [XM]>>> Yes, your text looks better to me. How about Jeff and Gorry? > > > I do think the addition of the reference helps. Thanks.
This gives context and informs people who might like being creative with different ways to design this mechanism. Gorry > Best Regards, > > Xiao Min > > > > Thanks! > Dhruv > >> Cheers, >> >> Xiao Min >> > >
