Re: BFD w/ static routes and single-hop eBGP

Dave Katz <dkatz@juniper.net> Tue, 25 October 2005 15:53 UTC

Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EUR6j-00038v-5w; Tue, 25 Oct 2005 11:53:01 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EUR6h-00038h-6N for rtg-bfd@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Oct 2005 11:52:59 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA01225 for <rtg-bfd@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Oct 2005 11:52:43 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from www8.cruzio.com ([63.249.95.19]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EURJg-0000Q7-9f for rtg-bfd@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Oct 2005 12:06:24 -0400
Received: from [172.16.12.139] (pcp08543197pcs.sntafe01.nm.comcast.net [68.35.73.229]) by www8.cruzio.com with ESMTP id j9PFqubV044313; Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:52:57 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0510251322180.20898@netcore.fi>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0510251322180.20898@netcore.fi>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v734)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <CB0F3AE7-D436-46F2-9F11-171AF9B69163@juniper.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Dave Katz <dkatz@juniper.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 09:52:49 -0600
To: Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.734)
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: a7d6aff76b15f3f56fcb94490e1052e4
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: rtg-bfd@ietf.org
Subject: Re: BFD w/ static routes and single-hop eBGP
X-BeenThere: rtg-bfd@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "RTG Area: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection DT" <rtg-bfd.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-bfd>, <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:rtg-bfd@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-bfd>, <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: rtg-bfd-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: rtg-bfd-bounces@ietf.org

Seems like we've beaten this one to death already.

For static routes, by their nature, there can be no interoperability  
problem as there is nothing to interoperate.

I don't see what else there is to specify for eBGP.  (This makes it  
considerably shorter than two pages.)

--Dave

On Oct 25, 2005, at 4:28 AM, Pekka Savola wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I still want to see the details of BFD with:
>  - single-hop static routes
>  - single-hop eBGP
>
> .. in some document.  At the last meeting, David said that he  
> didn't believe these are necessary as the bfd-generic-01 doc  
> includes this information but I disagree.  Even if the details are  
> trivial (they may or may not be), as an operator I think it's vital  
> to see them spelled out anywhere so that we can point vendors to a  
> specific section of a spec in CFTs and ensure the protocols will be  
> interoperable.
>
> I suggest a section or two either in the main body of the spec or  
> in an appendix either in draft-ietf-bfd-v4v6-1hop or draft-ietf-bfd- 
> generic.
>
> All of this would likely fit in one or two pages -- and if not,  
> that would be even stronger reason that those details must be  
> written out. At least one deployed implementation of static routes  
> + BFD already exists.
>
> -- 
> Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
> Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
> Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
>
>