>We did not receive any comments on the WGLC for draft->ietf-p2mp-bfd-04.txt >(https://www.ietf.org/mail->archive/web/trill/current/msg07692.html ><https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/trill/current/msg07692.html>). >Perhaps this was because I started the WG LC during >Chinese new year. We >will try a second WG LC before declaring "no support for >this draft"
>In your comments please consider, >1) Does the support of multi-point BFD aid >deployments? >2) Are the suggested additions to RFC7177 >bootstrapping sufficient for >this technology? >3) Do you feel this technology is ready for >standardization? I do support this draft and think it is good for standardisation. Thanks Santosh P K
_______________________________________________ trill mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill
