Hi Jeff,
I could be one minutes taker if no others experienced volunteered. Best Regards, Xiao Min 原始邮件 发件人：JeffreyHaas <jh...@pfrc.org> 收件人：rtg-bfd@ietf.org <rtg-bfd@ietf.org>; 抄送人：Reshad Rahman (rrahman) <rrah...@cisco.com>; 日 期 ：2019年11月10日 03:28 主 题 ：Re: IETF-106 agenda? Working Group, We will be attempting to meet at IETF-106. There's just enough business to discuss to warrant using our time slot. Note as below: We do not currently have a minutes taker. If we do not have one (ideally volunteering ahead of time) by meeting start time, we will suspend without a meeting. The authors of BFD for vxlan are requested to prepare slides covering changes since the last IETF and a summary of the rather energetic discussion we've had since that meeting. Additionally, please summarize the open issues since we have a few still being discussed on the list. Please recall that BFD is meeting on Tuesday. Please send me your slides by Sunday. ----- Current targeted agenda: Chairs update: 5 mins - Jeff Haas BFD for vxlan: 15 minutes - TBD BFD for Large Packets: 5 minutes - Jeff BFD Demand Mode: 10 minutes - Greg Using One-Arm BFD in Cloud Network: 10 minutes -- Jeff On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 02:15:35PM -0400, Jeffrey Haas 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.
