draft-ietf-bfd-unsolicited-06.txt   draft-ietf-bfd-unsolicited-07.txt 
Network Working Group E. Chen Network Working Group E. Chen
Internet-Draft Palo Alto Networks Internet-Draft Palo Alto Networks
Intended status: Standards Track N. Shen Intended status: Standards Track N. Shen
Expires: April 24, 2022 Zededa Expires: 27 April 2022 Zededa
R. Raszuk R. Raszuk
NTT Network Innovations NTT Network Innovations
R. Rahman R. Rahman
October 21, 2021 24 October 2021
Unsolicited BFD for Sessionless Applications Unsolicited BFD for Sessionless Applications
draft-ietf-bfd-unsolicited-06 draft-ietf-bfd-unsolicited-07
Abstract Abstract
For operational simplification of "sessionless" applications using For operational simplification of "sessionless" applications using
BFD, in this document we present procedures for "unsolicited BFD" BFD, in this document we present procedures for "unsolicited BFD"
that allow a BFD session to be initiated by only one side, and be that allow a BFD session to be initiated by only one side, and be
established without explicit per-session configuration or established without explicit per-session configuration or
registration by the other side (subject to certain per-interface or registration by the other side (subject to certain per-interface or
per-router policies). per-router policies).
skipping to change at page 1, line 47 skipping to change at page 1, line 47
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on April 24, 2022. This Internet-Draft will expire on 27 April 2022.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
publication of this document. Please review these documents Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Procedures for Unsolicited BFD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Procedures for Unsolicited BFD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. State Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. State Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. YANG Data Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4. YANG Data Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1. Unsolicited BFD Hierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4.1. Unsolicited BFD Hierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.2. Unsolicited BFD Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4.2. Unsolicited BFD Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7.1. BFD Protocol Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . 9 7.1. BFD Protocol Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . 9
7.2. YANG Module Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . 9 7.2. YANG Module Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The current implementation and deployment practice for BFD ([RFC5880] The current implementation and deployment practice for BFD ([RFC5880]
and [RFC5881]) usually requires BFD sessions be explicitly configured and [RFC5881]) usually requires BFD sessions be explicitly configured
or registered on both sides. This requirement is not an issue when or registered on both sides. This requirement is not an issue when
an application like BGP [RFC4271] has the concept of a "session" that an application like BGP [RFC4271] has the concept of a "session" that
involves both sides for its establishment. However, this requirement involves both sides for its establishment. However, this requirement
can be operationally challenging when the prerequisite "session" does can be operationally challenging when the prerequisite "session" does
not naturally exist between two endpoints in an application. not naturally exist between two endpoints in an application.
Simultaneous configuration and coordination may be required on both Simultaneous configuration and coordination may be required on both
sides for BFD to take effect. For example: sides for BFD to take effect. For example:
o When BFD is used to keep track of the "liveness" of the nexthop of * When BFD is used to keep track of the "liveness" of the nexthop of
static routes. Although only one side may need the BFD static routes. Although only one side may need the BFD
functionality, currently both sides need to be involved in functionality, currently both sides need to be involved in
specific configuration and coordination and in some cases static specific configuration and coordination and in some cases static
routes are created unnecessarily just for BFD. routes are created unnecessarily just for BFD.
o When BFD is used to keep track of the "liveness" of the third-pary * When BFD is used to keep track of the "liveness" of the third-pary
nexthop of BGP routes received from the Route Server [RFC7947] at nexthop of BGP routes received from the Route Server [RFC7947] at
an Internet Exchange Point (IXP). As the third-party nexthop is an Internet Exchange Point (IXP). As the third-party nexthop is
different from the peering address of the Route Server, for BFD to different from the peering address of the Route Server, for BFD to
work, currently two routers peering with the Route Server need to work, currently two routers peering with the Route Server need to
have routes and nexthops from each other (although indirectly via have routes and nexthops from each other (although indirectly via
the Router Server), and the nexthop of each router must be present the Router Server), and the nexthop of each router must be present
at the same time. These issues are also discussed in at the same time. These issues are also discussed in
[I-D.ietf-idr-rs-bfd]. [I-D.ietf-idr-rs-bfd].
Clearly it is beneficial and desirable to reduce or eliminate Clearly it is beneficial and desirable to reduce or eliminate
skipping to change at page 5, line 39 skipping to change at page 5, line 44
+--:(single-interval) {single-minimum-interval}? +--:(single-interval) {single-minimum-interval}?
+--rw min-interval? uint32 +--rw min-interval? uint32
augment /rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols augment /rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols
/rt:control-plane-protocol/bfd:bfd/bfd-ip-sh:ip-sh /rt:control-plane-protocol/bfd:bfd/bfd-ip-sh:ip-sh
/bfd-ip-sh:sessions/bfd-ip-sh:session: /bfd-ip-sh:sessions/bfd-ip-sh:session:
+--ro unsolicited +--ro unsolicited
+--ro role? bfd-unsol:unsolicited-role +--ro role? bfd-unsol:unsolicited-role
4.2. Unsolicited BFD Module 4.2. Unsolicited BFD Module
<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-bfd-unsolicited@2021-10-21.yang" <CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-bfd-unsolicited@2021-10-24.yang"
module ietf-bfd-unsolicited { module ietf-bfd-unsolicited {
yang-version 1.1; yang-version 1.1;
namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-bfd-unsolicited"; namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-bfd-unsolicited";
prefix "bfd-unsol"; prefix "bfd-unsol";
// RFC Ed.: replace occurences of YYYY with actual RFC numbers // RFC Ed.: replace occurences of YYYY with actual RFC numbers
// and remove this note // and remove this note
import ietf-bfd-types { import ietf-bfd-types {
prefix "bfd-types"; prefix "bfd-types";
reference "RFC 9127: YANG Data Model for BFD"; reference "RFC 9127: YANG Data Model for BFD";
} }
import ietf-bfd { import ietf-bfd {
prefix "bfd"; prefix "bfd";
reference "RFC 9127: YANG Data Model for BFD"; reference "RFC 9127: YANG Data Model for BFD";
} }
skipping to change at page 6, line 29 skipping to change at page 6, line 34
import ietf-routing { import ietf-routing {
prefix "rt"; prefix "rt";
reference reference
"RFC 8349: A YANG Data Model for Routing Management "RFC 8349: A YANG Data Model for Routing Management
(NMDA version)"; (NMDA version)";
} }
organization "IETF BFD Working Group"; organization "IETF BFD Working Group";
contact contact
"WG Web: <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/bfd> "WG Web: <https://tools.ietf.org/wg/bfd>
WG List: <rtg-bfd@ietf.org> WG List: <rtg-bfd@ietf.org>
Editors: Enke Chen (enchen@paloaltonetworks.com), Editors: Enke Chen (enchen@paloaltonetworks.com),
Naiming Shen (naiming@zededa.com), Naiming Shen (naiming@zededa.com),
Robert Raszuk (robert@raszuk.net), Robert Raszuk (robert@raszuk.net),
Reshad Rahman (reshad@yahoo.com)"; Reshad Rahman (reshad@yahoo.com)";
description description
"This module contains the YANG definition for BFD unsolicited "This module contains the YANG definition for BFD unsolicited
as per RFC YYYY. as per RFC YYYY.
skipping to change at page 7, line 8 skipping to change at page 7, line 13
to the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License to the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License
set forth in Section 4.c of the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions set forth in Section 4.c of the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions
Relating to IETF Documents Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info). (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
This version of this YANG module is part of RFC YYYY; see This version of this YANG module is part of RFC YYYY; see
the RFC itself for full legal notices."; the RFC itself for full legal notices.";
reference "RFC YYYY"; reference "RFC YYYY";
revision 2021-10-21 { revision 2021-10-24 {
description "Initial revision."; description "Initial revision.";
reference "RFC YYYY: A YANG data model for BFD unsolicited"; reference "RFC YYYY: Unsolicited BFD for Sessionless Applications.";
} }
/* /*
* Feature definitions * Feature definitions
*/ */
feature unsolicited-params-global { feature unsolicited-params-global {
description description
"This feature indicates that the server supports global "This feature indicates that the server supports global
parameters for unsolicited sessions."; parameters for unsolicited sessions.";
} }
skipping to change at page 8, line 47 skipping to change at page 9, line 4
+ "bfd-ip-sh:sessions/bfd-ip-sh:session" { + "bfd-ip-sh:sessions/bfd-ip-sh:session" {
description description
"Augmentation for BFD unsolicited on IP single-hop session"; "Augmentation for BFD unsolicited on IP single-hop session";
container unsolicited { container unsolicited {
config false; config false;
description description
"BFD IP single-hop session unsolicited top level container"; "BFD IP single-hop session unsolicited top level container";
leaf role { leaf role {
type bfd-unsol:unsolicited-role; type bfd-unsol:unsolicited-role;
description "Role."; description "Role.";
} }
} }
} }
} }
<CODE ENDS> <CODE ENDS>
5. IANA Considerations 5. IANA Considerations
This documents makes no IANA requests. This document registers the following namespace URI in the "IETF XML
Registry" [RFC3688]:
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-bfd-unsolicited
Registrant Contact: The IESG.
XML: N/A; the requested URI is an XML namespace.
This document registers the following YANG module in the "YANG Module
Names" registry [RFC6020]:
Name: ietf-bfd-unsolicited
Namespace: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-bfd-unsolicited
Prefix: ietf-bfd-unsolicited
Reference: RFC YYYY
6. Acknowledgments 6. Acknowledgments
Authors would like to thank Acee Lindem, Greg Mirsky, Jeffrey Haas Authors would like to thank Acee Lindem, Greg Mirsky, Jeffrey Haas
and Raj Chetan for their review and valuable input. and Raj Chetan for their review and valuable input.
7. Security Considerations 7. Security Considerations
7.1. BFD Protocol Security Considerations 7.1. BFD Protocol Security Considerations
The same security considerations and protection measures as those The same security considerations and protection measures as those
described in [RFC5880] and [RFC5881] normatively apply to this described in [RFC5880] and [RFC5881] normatively apply to this
document. With "unsolicited BFD" there is potential risk for document. With "unsolicited BFD" there is potential risk for
excessive resource usage by BFD from "unexpected" remote systems. To excessive resource usage by BFD from "unexpected" remote systems. To
mitigate such risks, the following measures are mandatory: mitigate such risks, the following measures are mandatory:
o Limit the feature to specific interfaces, and to a single-hop BFD * Limit the feature to specific interfaces, and to a single-hop BFD
with "TTL=255" [RFC5082]. For numbered interfaces source address with "TTL=255" [RFC5082]. For numbered interfaces source address
of an incoming BFD packet should belongs to the subnet of the of an incoming BFD packet should belongs to the subnet of the
interface from which the BFD packet is received. For unnumbered interface from which the BFD packet is received. For unnumbered
interfaces the above check should be aligned with routing protocol interfaces the above check should be aligned with routing protocol
addresses running on such pair of interfaces. addresses running on such pair of interfaces.
o Apply "access control" to allow BFD packets only from certain * Apply "access control" to allow BFD packets only from certain
subnets or hosts. subnets or hosts.
o Deploy the feature only in certain "trustworthy" environment, * Deploy the feature only in certain "trustworthy" environment,
e.g., at an IXP, or between a provider and its customers. e.g., at an IXP, or between a provider and its customers.
o Adjust BFD parameters as needed for the particular deployment and * Adjust BFD parameters as needed for the particular deployment and
scale. scale.
o Use BFD authentication. * Use BFD authentication.
7.2. YANG Module Security Considerations 7.2. YANG Module Security Considerations
The YANG module specified in this document defines a schema for data The YANG module specified in this document defines a schema for data
that is designed to be accessed via network management protocols such that is designed to be accessed via network management protocols such
as NETCONF [RFC6241] or RESTCONF [RFC8040]. The lowest NETCONF layer as NETCONF [RFC6241] or RESTCONF [RFC8040]. The lowest NETCONF layer
is the secure transport layer, and the mandatory-to-implement secure is the secure transport layer, and the mandatory-to-implement secure
transport is Secure Shell (SSH) [RFC6242]. The lowest RESTCONF layer transport is Secure Shell (SSH) [RFC6242]. The lowest RESTCONF layer
is HTTPS, and the mandatory-to-implement secure transport is TLS is HTTPS, and the mandatory-to-implement secure transport is TLS
[RFC5246]. [RFC5246].
skipping to change at page 10, line 18 skipping to change at page 10, line 45
writable/creatable/deletable (i.e., config true, which is the writable/creatable/deletable (i.e., config true, which is the
default). These data nodes may be considered sensitive or vulnerable default). These data nodes may be considered sensitive or vulnerable
in some network environments. Write operations (e.g., edit-config) in some network environments. Write operations (e.g., edit-config)
to these data nodes without proper protection can have a negative to these data nodes without proper protection can have a negative
effect on network operations. These are the subtrees and data nodes effect on network operations. These are the subtrees and data nodes
and their sensitivity/vulnerability: and their sensitivity/vulnerability:
/routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/bfd/ip-sh /routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/bfd/ip-sh
/unsolicited: /unsolicited:
o data node "enable" enables creation of unsolicited BFD IP single- * data node "enable" enables creation of unsolicited BFD IP single-
hop sessions globally, i.e. on all interfaces. See Section 7.1. hop sessions globally, i.e. on all interfaces. See Section 7.1.
o data nodes local-multiplier, desired-min-tx-interval, required- * data nodes local-multiplier, desired-min-tx-interval, required-
min-rx-interval and min-interval all impact the parameters of the min-rx-interval and min-interval all impact the parameters of the
unsolicited BFD IP single-hop sessions. unsolicited BFD IP single-hop sessions.
/routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/bfd/ip-sh /routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/bfd/ip-sh
/interfaces/interface/unsolicited: /interfaces/interface/unsolicited:
o data node "enable" enables creation of unsolicited BFD IP single- * data node "enable" enables creation of unsolicited BFD IP single-
hop sessions on a specific interface. See Section 7.1. hop sessions on a specific interface. See Section 7.1.
o data nodes local-multiplier, desired-min-tx-interval, required- * data nodes local-multiplier, desired-min-tx-interval, required-
min-rx-interval and min-interval all impact the parameters of the min-rx-interval and min-interval all impact the parameters of the
unsolicited BFD IP single-hop sessions on the interface. unsolicited BFD IP single-hop sessions on the interface.
Some of the readable data nodes in this YANG module may be considered Some of the readable data nodes in this YANG module may be considered
sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments. It is thus sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments. It is thus
important to control read access (e.g., via get, get-config, or important to control read access (e.g., via get, get-config, or
notification) to these data nodes. These are the subtrees and data notification) to these data nodes. These are the subtrees and data
nodes and their sensitivity/vulnerability: nodes and their sensitivity/vulnerability:
/routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/bfd/ip-sh /routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/bfd/ip-sh
skipping to change at page 11, line 8 skipping to change at page 11, line 29
the role of the local system in the creation of the unsolicited BFD the role of the local system in the creation of the unsolicited BFD
session. session.
8. References 8. References
8.1. Normative References 8.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-bfd-yang] [I-D.ietf-bfd-yang]
Rahman, R., Zheng, L., Jethanandani, M., Pallagatti, S., Rahman, R., Zheng, L., Jethanandani, M., Pallagatti, S.,
and G. Mirsky, "YANG Data Model for Bidirectional and G. Mirsky, "YANG Data Model for Bidirectional
Forwarding Detection (BFD)", draft-ietf-bfd-yang-17 (work Forwarding Detection (BFD)", Work in Progress, Internet-
in progress), August 2018. Draft, draft-ietf-bfd-yang-17, 2 August 2018,
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-bfd-yang-
17.txt>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3688>.
[RFC5082] Gill, V., Heasley, J., Meyer, D., Savola, P., Ed., and C. [RFC5082] Gill, V., Heasley, J., Meyer, D., Savola, P., Ed., and C.
Pignataro, "The Generalized TTL Security Mechanism Pignataro, "The Generalized TTL Security Mechanism
(GTSM)", RFC 5082, DOI 10.17487/RFC5082, October 2007, (GTSM)", RFC 5082, DOI 10.17487/RFC5082, October 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5082>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5082>.
[RFC5246] Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security [RFC5246] Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security
(TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", RFC 5246, (TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", RFC 5246,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5246, August 2008, DOI 10.17487/RFC5246, August 2008,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5246>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5246>.
[RFC5880] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection [RFC5880] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
(BFD)", RFC 5880, DOI 10.17487/RFC5880, June 2010, (BFD)", RFC 5880, DOI 10.17487/RFC5880, June 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5880>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5880>.
[RFC5881] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection [RFC5881] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
(BFD) for IPv4 and IPv6 (Single Hop)", RFC 5881, (BFD) for IPv4 and IPv6 (Single Hop)", RFC 5881,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5881, June 2010, DOI 10.17487/RFC5881, June 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5881>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5881>.
[RFC6020] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for
the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6020, October 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6020>.
[RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., [RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed.,
and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol
(NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011, (NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6241>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6241>.
[RFC6242] Wasserman, M., "Using the NETCONF Protocol over Secure [RFC6242] Wasserman, M., "Using the NETCONF Protocol over Secure
Shell (SSH)", RFC 6242, DOI 10.17487/RFC6242, June 2011, Shell (SSH)", RFC 6242, DOI 10.17487/RFC6242, June 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6242>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6242>.
[RFC6536] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration [RFC6536] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration
skipping to change at page 12, line 14 skipping to change at page 12, line 46
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>. May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
8.2. Informative References 8.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-idr-rs-bfd] [I-D.ietf-idr-rs-bfd]
Bush, R., Haas, J., Scudder, J. G., Nipper, A., and C. Bush, R., Haas, J., Scudder, J. G., Nipper, A., and C.
Dietzel, "Making Route Servers Aware of Data Link Failures Dietzel, "Making Route Servers Aware of Data Link Failures
at IXPs", draft-ietf-idr-rs-bfd-09 (work in progress), at IXPs", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-
September 2020. idr-rs-bfd-09, 21 September 2020,
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-idr-rs-bfd-
09.txt>.
[RFC4271] Rekhter, Y., Ed., Li, T., Ed., and S. Hares, Ed., "A [RFC4271] Rekhter, Y., Ed., Li, T., Ed., and S. Hares, Ed., "A
Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271, Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4271, January 2006, DOI 10.17487/RFC4271, January 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4271>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4271>.
[RFC7880] Pignataro, C., Ward, D., Akiya, N., Bhatia, M., and S. [RFC7880] Pignataro, C., Ward, D., Akiya, N., Bhatia, M., and S.
Pallagatti, "Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection Pallagatti, "Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
(S-BFD)", RFC 7880, DOI 10.17487/RFC7880, July 2016, (S-BFD)", RFC 7880, DOI 10.17487/RFC7880, July 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7880>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7880>.
skipping to change at page 13, line 4 skipping to change at page 13, line 36
Enke Chen Enke Chen
Palo Alto Networks Palo Alto Networks
Email: enchen@paloaltonetworks.com Email: enchen@paloaltonetworks.com
Naiming Shen Naiming Shen
Zededa Zededa
Email: naiming@zededa.com Email: naiming@zededa.com
Robert Raszuk Robert Raszuk
NTT Network Innovations NTT Network Innovations
940 Stewart Dr 940 Stewart Dr
Sunnyvale, CA 94085 Sunnyvale, CA 94085
USA United States of America
Email: robert@raszuk.net Email: robert@raszuk.net
Reshad Rahman Reshad Rahman
Email: reshad@yahoo.com Email: reshad@yahoo.com
 End of changes. 33 change blocks. 
41 lines changed or deleted 72 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/