Re: The BFD WG has placed draft-spallagatti-bfd-vxlan in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued"

"Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <> Wed, 03 January 2018 14:08 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 541B01201F8; Wed, 3 Jan 2018 06:08:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.529
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.529 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Fmhh6wE__xcU; Wed, 3 Jan 2018 06:08:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AA449126B72; Wed, 3 Jan 2018 06:08:38 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=9294; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1514988518; x=1516198118; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=dVTJId7NcRNBZQUzzuWOlvXAACp3YsD1fRdiIBb4UFQ=; b=B7Zr/1kiEhCl+JC4mSngom04OPDfiIBNkESMPv76HXlsI/LsbkXJ8Dsf eAqHrTQGPsYexMbKfTp63740o1XcA3GEq6R8ib/C7g0gGxYt647xGboGM onZHQ5yi2SWCYO75rtTrWQRPeQkA8+BOnE9bCiYG+E5KahDQdwe7WmfKr s=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.45,501,1508803200"; d="scan'208,217";a="338540892"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 03 Jan 2018 14:08:37 +0000
Received: from ( []) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w03E8blY028253 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 3 Jan 2018 14:08:37 GMT
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Wed, 3 Jan 2018 09:08:36 -0500
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Wed, 3 Jan 2018 09:08:36 -0500
From: "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <>
To: "" <>
CC: "" <>, "" <>
Subject: Re: The BFD WG has placed draft-spallagatti-bfd-vxlan in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued"
Thread-Topic: The BFD WG has placed draft-spallagatti-bfd-vxlan in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued"
Thread-Index: AQHTem6J7hwRQo9eEkKGdW65xjeDSqNil6MA
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 14:08:36 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D211768C9A7F44B98D366AF6B30A7356ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "RTG Area: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection DT" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2018 14:08:42 -0000


I read through draft-spallagatti-bfd-vxlan-06 and support its adoption as a BFD WG document.

I do have some comments and questions, which might require follow-up but neither of which is blocking on adoption. These questions can be discussed by the WG after a potential adoption.

1. References: The references should be appropriately split into Normative and Informative. For example, [I-D.ietf-bfd-multipoint] is not Normative.

2. S-BFD: I wonder given the work on this document and request for a dedicated MAC address, I wonder if it might make sense to also include S-BFD over VxLAN in this. It feels it might be a small incremental effort only, especially since support for BFD over UDP is specified.

3. “to enable continuity monitoring between Network Virtualization Edges (NVEs)” -> A visual on the actual termination points of the BFD sessions and what is being monitored will help.

4. "TTL: This MUST be set to 1.” -> I wonder if the value of using GTSM for this, since it’s within a tunnel only, was considered. Seems like using 255 and GTSM might be a better option.

5. Echo -> Any particular reason why Echo is outside scope? Seems it can be made work just fine.


Carlos Pignataro,<>

“Sometimes I use big words that I do not fully understand, to make myself sound more photosynthesis."

On Dec 21, 2017, at 10:15 AM, IETF Secretariat <<>> wrote:

The BFD WG has placed draft-spallagatti-bfd-vxlan in state
Call For Adoption By WG Issued (entered by Jeffrey Haas)

The document is available at

The authors of draft-spallagatti-bfd-vxlan have asked for adoption of their
draft by the BFD working group.  The BFD working group is chosen because the
document has implications on base RFC 5880 procedures.

Given the nature of the document, co-review and coordinated working group
last call with the nvo3 Working Group is expected.

The last date for comments for this adoption is January 20.  This extended
period is intended to accommodate end of year holidays.

A final note is that adoption is contingent upon our AD confirming this is
within current WG charter, or permitting us otherwise to re-charter