Re:Adoption call for draft-cw-bfd-unaffiliated-echo (ending 16 August, 2020)

liu.aihua@zte.com.cn Thu, 06 August 2020 04:12 UTC

Return-Path: <liu.aihua@zte.com.cn>
X-Original-To: rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A44603A0DF9 for <rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Aug 2020 21:12:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=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 PqEf_DxpyQVM for <rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Aug 2020 21:12:32 -0700 (PDT)
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 CFF433A0DF8 for <rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Aug 2020 21:12:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mse-fl2.zte.com.cn (unknown [10.30.14.239]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTPS id 1C21EE9EBE86A5352ED6 for <rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Aug 2020 12:12:27 +0800 (CST)
Received: from kjyxapp02.zte.com.cn ([10.30.12.201]) by mse-fl2.zte.com.cn with SMTP id 0764CPvU070501 for <rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Aug 2020 12:12:25 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from liu.aihua@zte.com.cn)
Received: from mapi (kjyxapp02[null]) by mapi (Zmail) with MAPI id mid13; Thu, 6 Aug 2020 12:12:25 +0800 (CST)
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 12:12:25 +0800 (CST)
X-Zmail-TransId: 2b045f2b83291b6c895e
X-Mailer: Zmail v1.0
Message-ID: <202008061212257792909@zte.com.cn>
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: <liu.aihua@zte.com.cn>
To: <rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com>
Subject: =?UTF-8?B?UmU6QWRvcHRpb24gY2FsbCBmb3IgZHJhZnQtY3ctYmZkLXVuYWZmaWxpYXRlZC1lY2hvIChlbmRpbmcgMTYgQXVndXN0LCAyMDIwKQ==?=
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====_001_next====="
X-MAIL: mse-fl2.zte.com.cn 0764CPvU070501
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-bfd/9HaymCOcXQ38iiQMCc2lOO4Ar7E>
X-BeenThere: rtg-bfd@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "RTG Area: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection DT" <rtg-bfd.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtg-bfd>, <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtg-bfd/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtg-bfd@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-bfd>, <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2020 04:12:34 -0000

I support WG adoption of this draft (as co-author). It simplifies the BFD deployment for the use cases showed in the draft.



Regards,


Aihua Liu