Hi Jeff, apologize for the belated update. The two new drafts, draft-tanmir-rtgwg-bfd-mc-lag-ip-00 draft-tanmir-rtgwg-bfd-mc-lag-mpls-00, been submitted and I've asked chairs for 15 minutes slot to present and discuss this work. Greatly appreciate your review, comments and suggestions.
Regards, Greg On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 3:11 PM, Jeffrey Haas <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 03:01:51PM -0700, Greg Mirsky wrote: > > Hi Jeff, > > we were not certain where these proposals would fit as there's no changes > > proposed to the BFD mechanism. The discussion is on the transport, > > encapsulation of BFD control packet. > > > > Always open to suggestions and greatly appreciate your consideration. > > Off the cuff, I'd say the work was appropriate to BFD. Mostly, I think > it's > just a bit unfair to hit RTGWG with something that required more than a > casual bit of background (BFD on LAG) to have an opinion on. Of course, I > leave that final determination to the RTGWG chairs. > > For the scope of the documents, I would normally suggest to just start on > the BFD mail list and get a bit of discussion going there. The work is, > IMO, clearly in charter for BFD and a reasonable candidate for quick > adoption and closure if there's implementation work. As I mentioned, it's > very minor surgery to the existing mechanism. > > > PS. Drafts just been uploaded today. > > I think one other item you might run afoul of is rtgwg prefers there be > some > list discussion before presentation slots get assigned. But that's the > chairs' prerogative. > > -- Jeff >
_______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
