Re: [Idr] [Lsvr] Why L2 liveness needed for BGP-SPF

Is IETF a new forum for Ethernet specification ? I was always under slight
impression that this is rather IEEE Ethernet WG ...

http://www.ieee802.org/3/

On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 4:43 PM, Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear All,
> hope an easy question you'll help me with. Liveness as path continuity
> check or as connectivity verification.
>
> Regards,
> Greg
>
> On Sun, Jul 22, 2018, 09:09 Victor Kuarsingh <victor@jvknet.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 7:35 AM Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
>>
>>> > L2 can be Ethernet, Token Ring, ATM, Frame Relay, PPP, SLIP, MTP2 and
>>> > others that may be invented in the future.
>>>
>>> it could be tin cans and a string.  but out here in the internet, it's
>>> ethernet.  there are tiny vestiges of sonet, which you seem to have
>>> forgotten; but no one is gonna run bgp-spf over them.  it is a mono-
>>> culture; ethernet won.
>>
>>
>>>
>> At this point, the current applicability for BGP-SPF is Data Center /
>> CLOS networks as described in the applicability document (
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-keyupate-lsvr-applicability-02)
>>
>> There is some texts around future use of this protocol (SP backbone), but
>> again not the focus of our current work.
>>
>> That said, as noted by Randy, these topologies are currently Ethernet (at
>> least in the cases we are aware of).
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Victor K
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> randy
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Idr mailing list
>>> Idr@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lsvr mailing list
>> Lsvr@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsvr
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lsvr mailing list
> Lsvr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsvr
>
>