Document: draft-ietf-bfd-stability Title: BFD Stability Reviewer: Mirja Kühlewind Review result: Ready with Nits This document has been reviewed as part of the transport area review team's ongoing effort to review key IETF documents. These comments were written primarily for the transport area directors, but are copied to the document's authors and WG to allow them to address any issues raised and also to the IETF discussion list for information. When done at the time of IETF Last Call, the authors should consider this review as part of the last-call comments they receive. Please always CC tsv-art@xxxxxxxx if you reply to or forward this review. There are no transport issues as this draft simply specifies an extension that adds a sequence number that can be used to detect loss and increment a loss count. However, especially Section 5 which is the main specification is not fully clear and could be further clarified, specifically: - “meticulously increasing sequence number” -> I know the term “meticulous” is used for BPF but I’m not sure the term is clear in the context of sequence number….? If you mean that all values have to be used at the sender without gaps, I think you should simply say that. - “If bfd.AuthSeqKnown is 0, bfd.AuthSeqKnown is set to 1” -> not sure what you want to say here…? Do you mean it will be set to 1 when a new packet is received (and not discarded)? Also you don’t really say what bfd.AuthSeqKnown is supposed to be at all? At minimum it would be good to say that it is defined in RFC5880 but even better would be to briefly recap what it is. - “If bfd.AuthSeqKnown is 1, and the received Sequence Number field is not equal to bfd.RcvAuthSeq + 1 (in a circular number space), then the loss count is incremented by one” -> This doesn’t seem correct. If more than one packet is lost, the loss count should not be increased by one but by the difference between last seen and the current value, no? - “when bfd.AuthSeqKnown is 1, the received Sequence Number MUST NOT be compared” -> this doesn’t really fit to the previous text, I guess you mean if bfd.AuthSeqKnown is already 1 when a new packet is received? Also in Section 6: - “When using MD5 or SHA authentication, BFD MUST use an authentication type (bfd.AuthType) that is of type meticulous” -> not fully sure what exactly you mean here. There is no type “meticulous” in itself. You mean type MUST be “Meticulous Keyed MD5” or “Meticulous Keyed SHA1”, respectively? I think it important to be correct here in the language you are using. -- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
