Re: Direct BFD over Ethernet?

[Jeffrey Haas <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 02:45:54PM +0000, Alexander Vainshtein wrote:
> Albrecht, Reshad and all,
> I concur with Reshad - it will work (RFC 7130 never says anything about the number of links in the LAG).

A somewhat perverse use of the feature. Cute. :-)

> Such a session would still use encapsulation in IP/UDP with the UDP destination port set to 6784 and the Destination IP address " that is configured on the peer system and can be reached via the LAG interface ". I.e., some lightweight IP functionality would be still required.

I'd expect there to be two interesting headaches:
1. In some implementations, you're shutting down "the lag" rather than the
link.  You'll effectively stop forwarding traffic, I think, but you may not
get the expected ifDown event on the link, only on the LAG-of-1 virtual
interface.

Clearly this is an implementation detail, but such things are what make LAGs
painful in IP protocols land.

2. The bootstrapping provisions require a bit more than just the
light-weight IP stack.  My employer's developers liked to say that they had
to operate at "layer 2.5" in order to get stuff to work before IP was
actually up.

-- Jeff