IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: Questions on draft-ashesh-bfd-stability-00.txt

Santosh P K <santoshpk@juniper.net> Sat, 28 March 2015 14:45 UTC

Return-Path: <santoshpk@juniper.net>
X-Original-To: rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0F721A8867 for <rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 28 Mar 2015 07:45:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.002
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 j4f2ZYfAe5HK for <rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 28 Mar 2015 07:45:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1on0760.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::760]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25F781A8837 for <rtg-bfd@ietf.org>; Sat, 28 Mar 2015 07:45:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from CO2PR0501MB822.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.244.144) by CO2PR0501MB1000.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (25.160.10.139) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.125.19; Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:45:01 +0000
Received: from CO2PR0501MB823.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.244.145) by CO2PR0501MB822.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.244.144) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.112.19; Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:44:59 +0000
Received: from CO2PR0501MB823.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.244.145]) by CO2PR0501MB823.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.244.145]) with mapi id 15.01.0125.002; Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:45:00 +0000
From: Santosh P K <santoshpk@juniper.net>
To: "D'SOUZA, KEVIN L" <kd6913@att.com>, "'rtg-bfd@ietf.org'" <rtg-bfd@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: Questions on draft-ashesh-bfd-stability-00.txt
Thread-Topic: Questions on draft-ashesh-bfd-stability-00.txt
Thread-Index: AdBo4mW50xu/AiZzTyGNpo8P5Uim8wAgqUcA
Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:44:59 +0000
Message-ID: <CO2PR0501MB8237671349A6C6BD81C86F7B3F70@CO2PR0501MB823.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
References: <9ED31ABC3EC39645977C39A2E8283C7C20CA75D1@MISOUT7MSGUSRDH.ITServices.sbc.com>
In-Reply-To: <9ED31ABC3EC39645977C39A2E8283C7C20CA75D1@MISOUT7MSGUSRDH.ITServices.sbc.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [116.197.184.12]
authentication-results: att.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:CO2PR0501MB822; UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:CO2PR0501MB1000;
x-forefront-antispam-report: BMV:1; SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(76576001)(87936001)(66066001)(2900100001)(62966003)(77096005)(92566002)(33656002)(2950100001)(86362001)(2656002)(99286002)(230783001)(74316001)(102836002)(122556002)(50986999)(77156002)(76176999)(40100003)(107886001)(46102003)(54356999)(491001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:CO2PR0501MB822; H:CO2PR0501MB823.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en;
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <CO2PR0501MB822125FED86667EE6364742B3F70@CO2PR0501MB822.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:;
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(5002010)(5005006); SRVR:CO2PR0501MB822; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:CO2PR0501MB822;
x-forefront-prvs: 05299D545B
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 28 Mar 2015 14:44:59.7205 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CO2PR0501MB822
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-bfd/WOStJqBuaaKLpIfeQ094top6jEI>
X-BeenThere: rtg-bfd@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:45:19 -0000

Hello Kevin,
     Thanks for your comments. Please see my inline reply. 

>1) Could you clarify if interop will be supported between these features and a BFD instantiation that does not support these features

Yes, it should have a backward compatibility. We will update document on backward compatibility section with use cases. 

> 2) Can you specify that these features will be optional for an implementation and some method should be provided to turn this capability off if needed

This is optional and it might be turned off by configuration? I think this is implementation detail but we could have recommendation in draft. 

>3) Can you clarify in the scope the relationship between the measurements that one would obtain with this method vs other traditional methods to measure >such criteria (e.g., CFM, TWAMP).  My concern is if this feature produces measurements that are different from the traditional methods, then it would be >difficult to reconcile them in a production environment

BFD will not replace CFM or TWAMP and it is not equipped to do so. We are updating the document with use cases and other recommendation please stayed tuned. 

> 4) How would this impact the scale of the BFD protocol?

Do you mean scale impact in steady state? 


Thanks
Santosh P K

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email