Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt

"Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" <rrahman@cisco.com> Mon, 14 August 2017 17:28 UTC

Return-Path: <rrahman@cisco.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 763C21323B3; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 10:28:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.521
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.521 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 fnbTpj-nEPHS; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 10:28:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.86.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C33FE1323B1; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 10:28:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1092; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1502731683; x=1503941283; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=UyyVxFxh0vFXG3OayB6Ry+I7PudiNgNboQrZhd7JlIo=; b=OfWJEj8oI3BRcOs0F+Bvs/jwdqkcQBpGRnRGS4WZ2SyJeUK528l1deLo AHs3zmhAMj7IKA0PDHmYnAWLIp10iZpWMvqyuEwJgTpUPjUxJYpd6iNa6 X7BMGSj8gIUxbHL/65xV/83pCdF+nw926mNmZl6fCqrAYZlqdxYKkiWXa g=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0CPAQCm3JFZ/5JdJa1dGQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBBwEBAQEBg1qBeAeeGYFulhiCEoVHAoR5QRYBAgEBAQEBAQFrKIUYAQEBAQI?= =?us-ascii?q?BeRACAQgOCi4yJQIEDgWKJwivTItiAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAR+DKIICg?= =?us-ascii?q?UyFCopnAQSgMQKUOpJVlhQBJggpgQp3FYdjdok+AYEOAQEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.41,374,1498521600"; d="scan'208";a="64560045"
Received: from rcdn-core-10.cisco.com ([173.37.93.146]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 Aug 2017 17:28:02 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-012.cisco.com (xch-rcd-012.cisco.com [173.37.102.22]) by rcdn-core-10.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v7EHS21j010308 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 14 Aug 2017 17:28:02 GMT
Received: from xch-rcd-005.cisco.com (173.37.102.15) by XCH-RCD-012.cisco.com (173.37.102.22) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 12:28:02 -0500
Received: from xch-rcd-005.cisco.com ([173.37.102.15]) by XCH-RCD-005.cisco.com ([173.37.102.15]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 12:28:02 -0500
From: "Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" <rrahman@cisco.com>
To: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>
CC: Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>, Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.qu@huawei.com>, "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>, "rtg-bfd@ietf.org" <rtg-bfd@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-bfd-yang@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-bfd-yang@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-ospf-yang@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ospf-yang@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt
Thread-Topic: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt
Thread-Index: AQHS8drqXiPB9yzw8Uyz6SEnSzAzYaJFxYCAgBeSvYCAAT4qwIAGf4+AgAMdioCAABQjAP//8hkAgAASYgD///B3AIAAawoAgAAI1YCAAY+3gP//wcOAAAht2QAAApY1AACKkk0AAAcEyAAAAQL8AAAHDDsAAB4sBYAAAdJCAAACGL0AAoMA9QAADBQjgP//wfKA
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2017 17:28:02 +0000
Message-ID: <D5B755DD.2D8D70%rrahman@cisco.com>
References: <C71CC69E-DAE4-49E0-983A-9B2EE9B4CD46@gmail.com> <D5A12762.2D4DB5%rrahman@cisco.com> <E4E310A2-A79C-403E-B68E-A39B76E2C5E0@gmail.com> <773E4FFC-D66A-49E5-A03A-58B7DBA82D90@gmail.com> <20170731170550.GO24942@pfrc.org> <BAF4C9E6-ED02-4E25-89DD-2FA181AF3B72@gmail.com> <3637B198-8F82-4A85-A4A1-4383AF98088D@pfrc.org> <D26CB257-E4B2-42FA-940E-BF77C8BC1751@gmail.com> <20170801144129.GC24942@pfrc.org> <F319C69C-3A4E-4C5C-ADA4-37BDFD97E91A@gmail.com> <20170801163340.GD24942@pfrc.org> <D5B73133.2D861A%rrahman@cisco.com> <BEFA04B6-55B8-42C4-ABC6-F50F5F9C77AB@pfrc.org>
In-Reply-To: <BEFA04B6-55B8-42C4-ABC6-F50F5F9C77AB@pfrc.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.7.1.161129
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [161.44.212.64]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2"
Content-ID: <12D87CD79B4E374FBBF23130703B9273@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-bfd/jfWV-pA7CJ4zGK8kH_mVBj97j70>
X-BeenThere: rtg-bfd@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Mon, 14 Aug 2017 17:28:05 -0000

Jeff, I agree. 

Regards,
Reshad.



On 2017-08-14, 1:10 PM, "Jeffrey Haas" <jhaas@pfrc.org> wrote:

>
>> On Aug 14, 2017, at 11:24 AM, Reshad Rahman (rrahman)
>><rrahman@cisco.com> wrote:
>> 
>> I am gradually catching up to emails so I may not have absorbed all the
>> emails I have gone through yetÅ .
>> 
>> Regarding echo config, we agreed in Chicago to remove the echo config
>> based on the fact that implementations of echo are vendor specific. e.g.
>> An implementation which has echo as continuous would likely have echo
>> configuration whereas an implementation which has echo as on-demand may
>> use RPC. There is an example of a vendor augmentation for echo config in
>> Appendix A.1.
>
>Right.  The point was what the echo configuration should look like.
>Based on glancing at a couple of vendor configs that use echo, it's
>mostly "use echo" as a boolean behavior.  This is in contrast with
>permitting the user to specify distinct echo vs. async timer values.
>
>I'm totally fine leaving the "on demand" case out of scope.
>
>-- Jeff
>