IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Ben Campbell's Discuss on draft-ietf-bfd-multipoint-active-tail-09: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 04 July 2018 19:54 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 36F9613109A; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 12:54:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 x3ngsSECh8mA; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 12:54:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi0-x22a.google.com (mail-oi0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22a]) (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 5CFB1131095; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 12:54:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id d189-v6so12623434oib.6; Wed, 04 Jul 2018 12:54:30 -0700 (PDT)
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=siucg98NhJ2s3KJT/IA4vhLQK+BBAWRkz7usA2dezZ8=; b=N5HxfJ8wySWXF0SamSGWq64NHtMjftQRT4Qz9ZnSC5Mov3Rx/h+6e7k1zlIkyj3w02 zKPgju8J7lnO8TNFegxdDT2c0iEm80/u0H74G9kRJ+1aeZRK+2bFIGe8/qeHihvLPnfa cejZJ86SJtHiiWt3a3zlRuXbSdY/9fAO7zk2T/9bck4LuZi9ANknKdKg01NHocVlLLsQ Btz0TiuIgwTAiOUtcmHh+H8rnqknBEIsk7+JJhq0YHl+E6bwZZ15JA9cJ8NaPspPIti7 Z6iswY9UTobaK/VOdMfq7JfX4Apl/UNpfViP9DjXcsyuOL6ccGY3a+E1CfKc2AITUrHp Nfyg==
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=siucg98NhJ2s3KJT/IA4vhLQK+BBAWRkz7usA2dezZ8=; b=J5vl2rpTyw3fIM2sX+5S8r/rU0NQoBRgu4KcT6HeJC0V3SDeuUYgX55pN1AFWYcQ+p FgLu+nQd0ZRY5ogJfhH46qlH9ZoaPOuXIQ81Eo1tT1d1WR9SvMv42A2musUuKJ/pNmPE NG/m/VQRRmCUge3TKXIY209JVLtRTI2Wa08eCjbwGnP8gOOcVkaYKWE2bzSmSlTAB8Ht o6BwFOFez6SIDQZOFeyNcHv6lUTyDJ3eNPGUb6yyXn5aOQjqUEyu/DEX82xJQB2qvW3C V8XqC1aTVI2+yvAa4VaPl4e2OmnNSyZ+8lTIzfhZed36D/KTunEMCQLNlmFC1FnzF+ao I0Zw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E3vNg1N4xDeUmM//gU/GwDQ7kqxW5O60KK/sRtiq1gplpNQVZ8r WD77wb/UghJQ5IyIPAi5YSBiKc/6L1ed5RL3jaM=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpdX0b4Idz6osA5D6Qu+5pr70PIhfhSjek6d1pO3ODViSH1NRtQ1HlqUoA2ppmsDg3twUpBNDTg+z+APkVFiCAg=
X-Received: by 2002:aca:a982:: with SMTP id s124-v6mr3072593oie.80.1530734069791; Wed, 04 Jul 2018 12:54:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 16:54:28 -0300
From: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <a9cc247a-d191-b140-df54-ae9a1d5f683e@nokia.com>
References: <153058091481.16153.3959347566479523455.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <b3a646ae-a553-1039-395c-908e13f66525@nokia.com> <65EA353F-7B5A-49E8-8B47-E93DFF355A16@nostrum.com> <0C29C8B4-7CEE-4B62-AF6E-66AD0F9AAE13@nostrum.com> <92d516ab-f108-18c4-54e6-a2a9adf73b32@nokia.com> <71D5A03C-78F2-48F6-AC4A-3B597AC637D9@nostrum.com> <a9cc247a-d191-b140-df54-ae9a1d5f683e@nokia.com>
X-Mailer: Airmail (467)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2018 16:54:28 -0300
Message-ID: <CAMMESsyPGR8bMq3rkYByUhE+BP-kGXqJROQwXAugn0_orvWtYw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Ben Campbell's Discuss on draft-ietf-bfd-multipoint-active-tail-09: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
To: Martin Vigoureux <martin.vigoureux@nokia.com>, Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
Cc: rrahman@cisco.com, draft-ietf-bfd-multipoint-active-tail@ietf.org, "bfd-chairs@ietf.org" <bfd-chairs@ietf.org>, iesg@ietf.org, rtg-bfd@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000079c223057031cc57"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-bfd/ofQhhkqD4RSl0qzcj9TWS4zzjSo>
X-BeenThere: rtg-bfd@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
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: Wed, 04 Jul 2018 19:54:33 -0000

FWIW, I think that the text below actually indicates that the behavior
in draft-ietf-bfd-multipoint-active-tail is not needed
for draft-ietf-bfd-multipoint to work.
IOW, draft-ietf-bfd-multipoint-active-tail is an option (as it says below),
only to be used “if a return path exists”…and it should then not formally
Update draft-ietf-bfd-multipoint.

Alvaro.

On July 4, 2018 at 6:08:49 PM, Martin Vigoureux (martin.vigoureux@nokia.com)
wrote:

[adding back authors/WG/chairs/shepherd, which I unintentionally pruned
by replying only to the list... sorry]

Thank you Ben. Perfectly clear to me now.

The Introduction of bfd-multipoint currently states:
As an option, if a return path from a tail to the head exists, the
tail may notify the head of the lack of multipoint connectivity.
Details of tail notification to the head are outside the scope of
this document and are discussed in
[I-D.ietf-bfd-multipoint-active-tail].

Would you consider this as sufficient?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email