Re: WG Adoption for draft-chen-bfd-unsolicted

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Mon, 29 October 2018 19:50 UTC

Return-Path: <acee@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 81F08130ECD; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 12:50:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.501
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 z8N6nU0QV7J9; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 12:50:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.86.72]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D8CA0131055; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 12:50:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1574; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1540842641; x=1542052241; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=PbY3GCUp00pAyYfJVvv28nP/V4XQBOgyNlUVnZRIacc=; b=Ql7l1fJ6FOBjObeHeqgOC1NJYf+ooMPse9Ri5gLkTDonvIwXQdDDzIHt 2xH5lxKR8uTJtdX/08diVswZV8KqIQxYqHjNfKsMBJ1Yp8YQBaVacAxxK 6ZoyqCVIMpm6pWkF98HldZmIsqNgAdKbQ6rADUg+HpmHSOzDgSlldoApF 0=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AFAADzY9db/5pdJa1lGgEBAQEBAgE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEHAgEBAQGBUQUBAQEBCwGCBGZ/KAqDa4gYjBmZLYF6CwEBI4RJAheDFiE?= =?us-ascii?q?0DQ0BAwEBAgEBAm0cDIU7BiMRRRACAQgODAImAgICMBUQAgQBDQWDIQGCAQ+?= =?us-ascii?q?qM4EuhD5APYRYBYELilwXggCBOB+CTIMbAgMBgXSCbTGCJgKJKpVfCQKGaIo?= =?us-ascii?q?aGIFShHeDHIZijHCKBQIRFIEmHTiBVXAVZQGCQYsZhT5vjAaBHwEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.54,441,1534809600"; d="scan'208";a="473003332"
Received: from rcdn-core-3.cisco.com ([173.37.93.154]) by rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 29 Oct 2018 19:50:40 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com (xch-rtp-012.cisco.com [64.101.220.152]) by rcdn-core-3.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id w9TJoeWv020109 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 29 Oct 2018 19:50:40 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com (64.101.220.152) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 15:50:39 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1395.000; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 15:50:39 -0400
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>, "rtg-bfd@ietf.org" <rtg-bfd@ietf.org>
CC: "draft-chen-bfd-unsolicited@ietf.org" <draft-chen-bfd-unsolicited@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: WG Adoption for draft-chen-bfd-unsolicted
Thread-Topic: WG Adoption for draft-chen-bfd-unsolicted
Thread-Index: AQHUb5+JEgYduIH79k6Kt3SsDra8m6U2ohaA
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 19:50:39 +0000
Message-ID: <F40C7106-C666-4BB9-963C-D7DA7E258630@cisco.com>
References: <20181029155232.GN12336@pfrc.org>
In-Reply-To: <20181029155232.GN12336@pfrc.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.200]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <11148B230A3BFF47B559594C79EBC875@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 64.101.220.152, xch-rtp-012.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-3.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-bfd/pjlvdgHkmFlAAPms03pV2sPLEsY>
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: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 19:50:47 -0000

Hi Jeff, 
I have read the draft and support WG adoption.
Thanks,
Acee

´╗┐On 10/29/18, 11:53 AM, "Rtg-bfd on behalf of Jeffrey Haas" <rtg-bfd-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of jhaas@pfrc.org> wrote:

    Working Group,
    
    Reviewing my notes, I was remiss in sending out an adoption request for
    draft-chen-bfd-unsolicted (Unsolicited BFD for Sessionless Applications).
    
    https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chen-bfd-unsolicited/
    
    This relatively minor change from the RFC 5880 spec is implemented by at
    least one vendor for static route configuration.  Its security
    considerations already cover what I believe to be the main concern with the
    procedural change.
    
    There's a minor point to resolve regarding the document's status - currently
    Informational - with our AD.
    
    Please indicate whether you'd support adopting this draft as a Working Group
    document.
    
    Authors, please indicate if you're aware of any applicable IPR on it.
    
    This adoption request will also end on Friday, November 9, IETF 103 Friday.
    
    -- Jeff & Reshad