Re: [RTG-DIR] Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-mpls-bfd-directed-07

[Greg Mirsky <[e-mail]>]

Hi Jeff,
thank you for pointing that the use of LSP Ping to update the existing BFD
session should be explicitly documented in the draft. I agree that this is
valid request and, if the MPLS WG agrees, will add it in the next version
along what I've outlined in our discussion.

Regards,
Greg

On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 2:23 AM, Jeffrey Haas <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 02:06:01AM -0700, Greg Mirsky wrote:
> > true, the RFC 5884 does not discuss handling of subsequent LSP Ping with
> > the same BFD Discriminator value in BFD Discriminator TLV. My reference
> to
> > RFC 5884 is to point that the default, implied path for the reverse
> > direction of the BFD session is over IP network and that how this draft
> > interprets BFD Reverse Path TLV with none- sub-TLVs included. And yes,
> > nodes that would support this draft MUST handle subsequent LSP Ping Echo
> > Request with BFD Discriminator and BFD Reverse TLVs.
> >
>
> I don't believe the procedure updating 5884 to change existing session
> properties is called out in the -directed document.  I don't have a strong
> opinion about the use case of whether such updates are desired or not.
> That's a decision for the MPLS WG.  However, I do think such procedure
> needs
> to be clear if it's desired.  This is part of Carlos' point.
>
> -- Jeff
>