[nvo3] Zaheduzzaman Sarker's No Objection on draft-ietf-nvo3-bfd-geneve-12: (with COMMENT)

[Zaheduzzaman Sarker via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Zaheduzzaman Sarker has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-nvo3-bfd-geneve-12: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-nvo3-bfd-geneve/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for working on this specification. Special thanks to Magnus Westerlund
for identifying an important aspect in his TSVART review and I am happy to see
the resolution in the -11 version of this doc.

I have stumbled upon similar clarification issues that John has brought up in
his discuss. It not clear to me how this validation need to be done as written
in Section 5.1

     Then the UDP destination port and the TTL or Hop Limit of the inner IP
     packet MUST be validated to determine whether the received packet can be
     processed by BFD.

I was expecting pointers for those validation mechanism special to BFD. Can we
be more clear on this?