IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Bier] Feedback on draft-hu-bier-bfd-02

<hu.fangwei@zte.com.cn> Thu, 08 November 2018 04:27 UTC

Return-Path: <hu.fangwei@zte.com.cn>
X-Original-To: bier@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bier@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A83C2130E9E; Wed, 7 Nov 2018 20:27:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.938
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.938 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_OBFUSCATE_05_10=0.26, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fJroaSuhpgGU; Wed, 7 Nov 2018 20:27:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mxhk.zte.com.cn (mxhk.zte.com.cn [63.217.80.70]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C54512958B; Wed, 7 Nov 2018 20:27:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mxct.zte.com.cn (unknown [192.168.164.217]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTPS id 5E0A328BB567129BEC7D; Thu, 8 Nov 2018 12:27:32 +0800 (CST)
Received: from mse01.zte.com.cn (unknown [10.30.3.20]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTPS id EEDC988B68B1D4CF4B85; Thu, 8 Nov 2018 12:27:23 +0800 (CST)
Received: from xgxapp02.zte.com.cn ([10.30.14.23]) by mse01.zte.com.cn with SMTP id wA84RIHb071032; Thu, 8 Nov 2018 12:27:18 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from hu.fangwei@zte.com.cn)
Received: from mapi (xgxapp01[null]) by mapi (Zmail) with MAPI id mid71; Thu, 8 Nov 2018 12:27:19 +0800 (CST)
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2018 12:27:19 +0800
X-Zmail-TransId: 2af95be3bb27eeb9865b
X-Mailer: Zmail v1.0
Message-ID: <201811081227199234176@zte.com.cn>
In-Reply-To: <CE547BEC-C580-4CC6-8B9B-CB22EE07E948@cisco.com>
References: CE547BEC-C580-4CC6-8B9B-CB22EE07E948@cisco.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: hu.fangwei@zte.com.cn
To: rrahman@cisco.com
Cc: draft-hu-bier-bfd@ietf.org, bier@ietf.org, bfd@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====_001_next====="
X-MAIL: mse01.zte.com.cn wA84RIHb071032
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bier/szSSnG4purUFkY4xrHf6wTAKQ0s>
Subject: Re: [Bier] Feedback on draft-hu-bier-bfd-02
X-BeenThere: bier@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "\"Bit Indexed Explicit Replication discussion list\"" <bier.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bier>, <mailto:bier-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bier/>
List-Post: <mailto:bier@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bier-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bier>, <mailto:bier-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2018 04:27:42 -0000

Hi, Rahman


Thanks for your comments.


Plese see inline marked with[hfw].






>Hi,


 


>I just took a quick look at the draft:

>1.Section 1, 2nd paragraph mentions “…detect unicast failures..”, I believe this  should be unidirectional?

[hfw] Agree, the BFD multipoint document only defines the unidirectional deteck from header to one or more tails.

>2.Section 1, 3rd paragraph says that active-tail is for further study. So when a tail detects a failure, how will the head be notified?  If the head does not have to be notified, what action is taken?


[hfw] Ok. Actually, we are considering the active-tails solution. It  will be added in the next version.






Regards


Fangwei.





发件人：ReshadRahman(rrahman) <rrahman@cisco.com>
收件人：draft-hu-bier-bfd@ietf.org <draft-hu-bier-bfd@ietf.org>;
抄送人：bier@ietf.org <bier@ietf.org>;bfd@ietf.org <bfd@ietf.org>;
日 期 ：2018年11月08日 11:56
主 题 ：Feedback on draft-hu-bier-bfd-02




Hi,


 


I just took a quick look at the draft:

Section 1, 2nd paragraph mentions “…detect unicast failures..”, I believe this  should be unidirectional?

Section 1, 3rd paragraph says that active-tail is for further study. So when a tail detects a failure, how will the head be notified?  If the head does not have to be notified, what action is taken?


 


Regards,


Reshad.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email