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

This is much better. Thanks for addressing my comments.

//Zahed

On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 9:25 AM <xiao.min2@zte.com.cn> wrote:

> Hi Zaheduzzaman,
>
>
> Thank you for the review and thoughtful comments.
>
> Please see inline.
> Original
> *From: *ZaheduzzamanSarkerviaDatatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
> *To: *The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>;
> *Cc: *draft-ietf-nvo3-bfd-geneve@ietf.org <
> draft-ietf-nvo3-bfd-geneve@ietf.org>;nvo3-chairs@ietf.org <
> nvo3-chairs@ietf.org>;nvo3@ietf.org <nvo3@ietf.org>;
> matthew.bocci@nokia.com <matthew.bocci@nokia.com>;matthew.bocci@nokia.com
> <matthew.bocci@nokia.com>;
> *Date: *2023年08月07日 21:39
> *Subject: **[nvo3] Zaheduzzaman Sarker's No Objection on
> draft-ietf-nvo3-bfd-geneve-12: (with COMMENT)*
> 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?
>
> [XM]>>> Yes. A new revision has just been posted, attempting to address
> all received comments. Link as below.
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-nvo3-bfd-geneve-13
>
> Please check whether this version clarifies the issue.
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Xiao Min
> _______________________________________________
> nvo3 mailing list
> nvo3@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
>
>
>