Jeff,
I have no objection to the comparison, please go on.
One thing I want to emphasize is that, whether DC use case (brought up by
draft-wang-bfd-one-arm-use-case) or broadband access use case (brought up by
BBF TR-146), the key requirement is that the peer system is totally
BFD-Unaware, in
David,
Thanks for the feedback. I had considered adding such a line to the statement
but was wary of the implication of "you must come here to participate". If
such is acceptable, I'll add it to the next iteration.
-- Jeff
> On Nov 24, 2021, at 6:07 PM, David Sinicrope
> wrote:
>
> Hi
Hi Jeff,
One suggestion on the
line requesting feedback: We don't really want any SDO using
the liaison process as a substitute for participation in the
IETF process. Some organizations consider a liaison to carry
the collective weight of
This looks like a fine liaison to me.
Thanks,
Donald
===
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA
d3e...@gmail.com
On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 11:46 AM Jeffrey Haas wrote:
>
> Working Group,
>
> The chairs are
Xiao Min,
BFD Echo, completely underspecified in RFC 5880, is fine with that lack of
detail when it is paired with an Async session.
For the unaffiliated case and no Async session to help provide correlating
activities, some of the work of Async will need to be done in the Echo stream
itself.
