Re:WGLC for draft-ietf-bfd-large-packets

<> Wed, 11 September 2019 03:34 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 274E2120025 for <>; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 20:34:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.197
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.197 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ouocCFJKAZq4 for <>; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 20:33:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EBE81120024 for <>; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 20:33:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (unknown []) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTPS id 289C0BED35584AC952C3; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 11:33:57 +0800 (CST)
Received: from ([]) by with SMTP id x8B3XjCK056466; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 11:33:45 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from
Received: from mapi (njxapp02[null]) by mapi (Zmail) with MAPI id mid201; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 11:33:45 +0800 (CST)
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 11:33:45 +0800
X-Zmail-TransId: 2afa5d786b191e0d1e7a
X-Mailer: Zmail v1.0
Message-ID: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re:WGLC for draft-ietf-bfd-large-packets
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====_001_next====="
X-MAIL: x8B3XjCK056466
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "RTG Area: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection DT" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 03:34:01 -0000

Hi Reshad,

I support this draft to be published, it provides a simple and elegant extension for BFD to verify path MTU.

By the way, if further we'd like to achieve a fine-grained process control while using BFD to verfiy or detect path MTU, with the cost of a more complex extention to BFD, then draft-mirmin-bfd-extended potentially can provide such a solution.

Best Regards,

Xiao Min


发件人:ReshadRahman(rrahman) <>
收件人 <>;
日 期 :2019年09月09日 23:14
主 题 :Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-bfd-large-packets

BFD WG, reminder that WGLC is ongoing for this document.





From: Rtg-bfd <> on behalf of "Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" <>
Date: Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 12:34 PM
To: "" <>
Subject: WGLC for draft-ietf-bfd-large-packets




As was mentioned at IETF105, this document is stable and there was an interop test done between FRR and Junos VMX.


Please provide comments/feedback on the document. The deadline for last call is September 13th.



Reshad & Jeff.