Re: BFD echo mode

"Vishwas Manral" <vishwas.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 27 November 2008 13:51 UTC

Return-Path: <rtg-bfd-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: rtg-bfd-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rtg-bfd-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DE533A68C3; Thu, 27 Nov 2008 05:51:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rtg-bfd@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtg-bfd@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FE083A68C3 for <rtg-bfd@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Nov 2008 05:51:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UpQCOnHn503H for <rtg-bfd@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Nov 2008 05:51:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fk-out-0910.google.com (fk-out-0910.google.com [209.85.128.184]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AB7E3A6832 for <rtg-bfd@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Nov 2008 05:51:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by fk-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id 18so912589fkq.5 for <rtg-bfd@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Nov 2008 05:51:43 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=Ffxfyj0kU6YKc+nsseUAKMyByz41h0qh8wCwR83fIxk=; b=G6wvdzbZMj9Yes9KQjLbMyxuKglKQN5QdHcjJGQvPKva9anyIMl+81rUH7c87Ky3s9 uN1qDrxEK5T0chnJMhIFKRS8T6VaKqFrPQ8/NX6/FUVIU1pTPyMMQ23UuACxRrhh0oBq KrvexFakGmWlaWXYx0Tpfom9Pgsg7W8JYokxk=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=GXNFETS//VdIzAeeEYfF6P1PiC13qBTnBbbaKOjSLeEIaG+yL12dJFjPB3fHdYMoPA ZtDEeW9T/FqR9b37Pip7B7tUo+YpxszJrKXKextiUbFhhfk5XNB3e0iO/+9C6Xt8RCb4 oY4p1AI6L5HjspXB/Kisy3yGeD8UqnspqeQ/s=
Received: by 10.181.56.1 with SMTP id i1mr1098728bkk.45.1227793903651; Thu, 27 Nov 2008 05:51:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.181.147.16 with HTTP; Thu, 27 Nov 2008 05:51:43 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <77ead0ec0811270551r71741f18gad85e5189800dd71@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 05:51:43 -0800
From: Vishwas Manral <vishwas.ietf@gmail.com>
To: "Nobo Akiya (nobo)" <nobo@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: BFD echo mode
In-Reply-To: <F3F69139C275F848A1DB1518DC2C216806859108@xmb-sjc-22c.amer.cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <77ead0ec0811260956u62e0e27aj66fbdba29453c5ad@mail.gmail.com> <F3F69139C275F848A1DB1518DC2C216806859108@xmb-sjc-22c.amer.cisco.com>
Cc: rtg-bfd@ietf.org, David Ward <dward@cisco.com>, Dave Katz <dkatz@juniper.net>
X-BeenThere: rtg-bfd@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "RTG Area: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection DT" <rtg-bfd.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-bfd>, <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/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>
Sender: rtg-bfd-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: rtg-bfd-bounces@ietf.org

Hi Nobo,

>> Seeing some vendor documentation it seems they use a seperate
>> port for the echo mode - as the source and the destination
>> address.
>
> I hope vendors aren't using different udp dest port for echo packets.
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bfd-v4v6-1hop-08 Sec4.1.
>
> BFD Echo packets MUST be transmitted in UDP packets with destination
> UDP port 3785 in an IPv4 packet.
Thankf for this.

>> Can the asusmption that the echo mode packet is a BFD packet
>> be made (so the BFD source / dest packet identifiers can be
>> used)? The base BFD spec seems to state the content of the
>> packet need not be specified as the packet is just looped back.
>
> BFD echo packets can be identified by UDP dest port 3785.
> Data beyond UDP header is not specified, and that's left up to vendors.
>
>> So I can see how we could look an IP packet in the case of
>> Single Hop (by having the MAC Destination Address of the
>> peer) but having IP address and destination the same (as of
>> the source).
>
> I don't think there's anything that specifies that dest & src addresses
> must be the same. For dest addresses tho, it maybe easier to
> demultiplex if dest address is the outgoing interface.
That is correct. I guess you mean the destination IP address in your
message above, is that right?

Thanks,
Vishwas

>
>