1 / 11

BFD Working Group Document Status – IETF 78

BFD Working Group Document Status – IETF 78. Jeffrey Haas, jhaas@pfrc.org Dave Ward, dward@juniper.net. Long ago, in an IETF far, far away…. From : Alex Zinin < zinin at psg.com > Date : Mon, 22 Mar 2004 15:38:42 -0800

peony
Download Presentation

BFD Working Group Document Status – IETF 78

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. BFD Working Group Document Status – IETF 78 Jeffrey Haas, jhaas@pfrc.org Dave Ward, dward@juniper.net

  2. Long ago, in an IETF far, far away… From: Alex Zinin <zinin at psg.com> Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 15:38:42 -0800 Folks- There has been some interest in having a more formal home for the BFD work, so we're creating a (hopefully) very focused and short-lived WG for it. Below is the proposed WG charter that Daves and I have crafted. Please read and comment. Also note that we are looking for the second co-chair. If you would like to volunteer and have enough cycles to help, please send me an e-mail. -- Alex Zinin

  3. Six Years Later • RFC 5880 - Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) • RFC 5881- Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) for IPv4 and IPv6 (Single Hop) • RFC 5882- Generic Application of Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) • RFC 5883 - Generic Application of Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) • RFC 5884 - Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) for MPLS Label Switched Paths (LSPs)

  4. Internet Standards Status • All of the recently published RFCs are at the Proposed Standard status. • There are many interoperable implementations based off the drafts. • But not all implementations implement all features.

  5. Internet Standards Status • RFC 2026 states: • “The requirement for at least two independent and interoperable implementations applies to all of the options and features of the specification. In cases in which one or more options or features have not been demonstrated in at least two interoperable implementations, the specification may advance to the Draft Standard level only if those options or features are removed.“ • Advancement to Draft Standard may require implementations to continue to mature.

  6. MIB • The MIB is the last incomplete item on our existing charter. • This is expected. MIB document stability will lag the protocol documents it is meant to cover. • The MIB has received a lot of recent attention and should be ready for MIB Doctor review soon.

  7. Outstanding MIB items • The remaining work on the MIB depends on the possible adoption of likely working group documents: • Point to Multipoint BFD • Generic cryptographic authentication • Both of the above items to be presented later.

  8. MIB for BFD-MPLS? • It is unclear how much effort should be expended to align the currently published MIB with a potential MIB for BFD-MPLS. • Interested parties should take discussion to the mailing list.

  9. “Topics for Possible Future Work” • From our existing charter: • Document BFD directly over 802.3 in close collaboration and synchronization with the IEEE. • IEEE solved the problem a different way: 802.1ag (2007).

  10. WG Document Summary • With the exception of the remaining MIB work, we have accomplished all of our chartered goals. • And even that depends on what we decide to do about rechartering.

  11. The Authors and Chairs would like to thank the Working Group for your collective efforts.

More Related