Re: [pim] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-pim-bfd-p2mp-use-case-09: (with COMMENT)

[Greg Mirsky <[e-mail]>]

Hi Éric,
thank you for your kind words supporting this work. Please find my notes
in-lined after your comments under the GIM>> tag. Attached, please find the
diff highlighting the updates in the working version of the draft.

Regards,
Greg

On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 7:42 AM Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-pim-bfd-p2mp-use-case-09: 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/blog/handling-iesg-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-pim-bfd-p2mp-use-case/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Thank you for the work put into this document.
>
> Please find below some non-blocking COMMENT points (but replies would be
> appreciated even if only for my own education).
>
> Special thanks to Mike McBride the shepherd's write-up including the
> section
> about the WG consensus.
>
> I hope that this helps to improve the document,
>
> Regards,
>
> -éric
>
> == COMMENTS ==
>
> Does the use of BFD prevent the use of normal PIM detection? It is a little
> unclear from the text and I hope that BFD comes on the top of normal PIM
> detection mode.
>
GIM>> You're correct, BFD does not negate any of the PIM mechanisms,
including the loss of a neighbor.  I would be much obliged if you can
suggest any text update or addition to stress that.

>
> -- Section 2.3 --
> Please add "All received BFD Control packets that are
>    demultiplexed to the session MUST be discarded if the received TTL or
>    Hop Limit is not equal to 255." Copied from RFC 5881.
>
 GIM>> Added.

>
> -- Section 4 --
> The security section appears rather light to me as now any BFD security
> issues
> can also impact PIM.
>
GIM>> Indeed. A reference to RFC 5881 has been added to the Security
Consideration section (working version).