Re: draft-ietf-bfd-vxlan IESG status

Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 25 February 2020 19:25 UTC

Return-Path: <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A8223A1315; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 11:25:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 ckFpSHDvw6As; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 11:25:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ed1-x52b.google.com (mail-ed1-x52b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17A4C3A130E; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 11:25:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ed1-x52b.google.com with SMTP id p14so666525edy.13; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 11:25:37 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=N2ozgfCCgvbWjMzqGc5GsvKqQ/h1jf6tVQ3yjqDEOMA=; b=UPtTc27vP/ph5QwlXQp/IgrhvBnrUycrJC2QsPNENRzolNf3FK/1xE/ln7Czt1v7f3 B0tyHLrh4bW6Zrw8bzDbPRH4eP+eXshT4Gdn94RVotKP/qu8xxm62qquKHs1y8KdvKGc 2Bf0hc1NekpoURNMAbngRs7EpYdNKqoci8OKw4okZFY0ovT1DfLX48YSyw59sgscwFbB k6Lrw/R1Zibn35ez5HP6fuHAxFx4khCvvMvxp1p74LdfiCAx0oIx27pR+XUrcInLfyZt DXZGej6S97Tneg7WHThl5dOFIZe8oCuYi06dgRNcjCNdpnjzcEeqMz90YpdX254WiZc6 +hyw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=N2ozgfCCgvbWjMzqGc5GsvKqQ/h1jf6tVQ3yjqDEOMA=; b=At/MQD0xxZzIdYOewIGM20ha9NsRKL/ki3bgbxJpHp//9Lk7lBJ1F9pW3UjymMdcKs SeJMrdCM2h74cVtUeKDllUemH078TcvfP1P9sxoY1k4AQsatjgnDMUxK3c0uI7dfAZ96 MuwL5r2h5/+k5aZJP0Jk+Q13MSr8+/WUTKuJa9eOeo2z1Efcl4mfDWjnNBjINC1pnB6b oGxQOS2rCPCqQFrHnkVt0lCoMPwmqcu+OZH+riHFrHPDuENc0dAmATNi8lC9fbbnpTyh jB1BWLKXOCecCDr0G96zv54vjyY6tIienfDsjWZ3+4NoenWAcBVYuXKyuQzoW5agiJZB jvmQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAX1kxUbGjKaPo/8aWd74wUJuUQ1JKHo+k6P0hnHHO2++DLyxIRb ugn4/V2iA33HtW8WN1peuho8Andbj/f5K3xGOY2a4GCD
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxCZxLo1cbX5vj/R8vo1f/6yd/6QfojgsDLSDw4/6QUbNf+bTkzmaMOhWbWGWOmEU4M/MWab72Lz5ZvxCS2jCQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:b301:: with SMTP id n1mr661732ejz.285.1582658735494; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 11:25:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 11:25:34 -0800
From: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+RyBmWTUks=Y2rPFmpgpXFDNSMjz92Csd7MfNeaaYWGA_ZpcQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <157660542458.26499.3977878811671361973.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CA+RyBmUPCrj_ahxa098vj__niNndjbOJEccA-KwoopgKp5C51Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAMMESszAax2AjRvw4wSS1ydBsDhEepyz3XASach46rxzGknX4g@mail.gmail.com> <20200127221705.GB17622@pfrc.org> <CA+RyBmWTUks=Y2rPFmpgpXFDNSMjz92Csd7MfNeaaYWGA_ZpcQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 11:25:34 -0800
Message-ID: <CAMMESsxX6UhxTV31TxTA+10NG1V62mgrcvf3ehW9mipuw+Yq3A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: draft-ietf-bfd-vxlan IESG status
To: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>, Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>
Cc: bfd-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-bfd-vxlan@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, rtg-bfd WG <rtg-bfd@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-bfd/cLbCgDGSUIQNPOmg-A_GmnH0l-8>
X-BeenThere: rtg-bfd@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 19:25:39 -0000

On January 27, 2020 at 5:44:24 PM, Greg Mirsky wrote:


Greg:

Hi!

> below are the proposed changes to address the IP TTL/Hop Limit open issue

I didn't see a discussion on the list, but since I'm holding the DISCUSS...

Your proposed changes are fine, just one nit:

...
> NEW TEXT:
> TTL or Hop Limit: MUST be set to 255 in accordance with the
> Generalized TTL Security Mechanism (GTSM) [RFC5082].

I think that a better reference would be rfc5881.


I will clear my DISCUSS once the WG confirms, and you submit an update.

Thanks!

Alvaro.


> On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 2:11 PM Jeffrey Haas wrote:
...
> >
> > Open Issue 1: Discussion on TTL/Hop Limit = 1
> >
> > Proposed Action: Greg has proposed text he will send to the working group
> > suggesting GTSM procedures be utilized. The expected concern is how this
> > impacts existing implementations.