--- 1/draft-ietf-bfd-unsolicited-08.txt	2021-12-03 10:13:12.769461949 -0800
+++ 2/draft-ietf-bfd-unsolicited-09.txt	2021-12-03 10:13:12.801462747 -0800
@@ -1,22 +1,22 @@
 
 Network Working Group                                            E. Chen
 Internet-Draft                                        Palo Alto Networks
 Intended status: Standards Track                                 N. Shen
-Expires: 30 May 2022                                              Zededa
+Expires: 6 June 2022                                              Zededa
                                                                R. Raszuk
                                                  NTT Network Innovations
                                                                R. Rahman
-                                                        26 November 2021
+                                                         3 December 2021
 
               Unsolicited BFD for Sessionless Applications
-                     draft-ietf-bfd-unsolicited-08
+                     draft-ietf-bfd-unsolicited-09
 
 Abstract
 
    For operational simplification of "sessionless" applications using
    BFD, in this document we present procedures for "unsolicited BFD"
    that allow a BFD session to be initiated by only one side, and be
    established without explicit per-session configuration or
    registration by the other side (subject to certain per-interface or
    per-router policies).
 
@@ -39,21 +39,21 @@
 
    Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
    Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
    working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
    Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
 
    Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
    and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
    time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
    material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
-   This Internet-Draft will expire on 30 May 2022.
+   This Internet-Draft will expire on 6 June 2022.
 
 Copyright Notice
 
    Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
    document authors.  All rights reserved.
 
    This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
    Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
    license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
    Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
@@ -66,25 +66,25 @@
 
    1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
    2.  Procedures for Unsolicited BFD  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
    3.  State Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
    4.  YANG Data Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
      4.1.  Unsolicited BFD Hierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
      4.2.  Unsolicited BFD Module  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
    5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
    6.  Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
    7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
-     7.1.  BFD Protocol Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . .  10
+     7.1.  BFD Protocol Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . .  11
      7.2.  YANG Module Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . .  11
    8.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
      8.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
-     8.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
+     8.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
    Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
 
 1.  Introduction
 
    The current implementation and deployment practice for BFD ([RFC5880]
    and [RFC5881]) usually requires BFD sessions be explicitly configured
    or registered on both sides.  This requirement is not an issue when
    an application like BGP [RFC4271] has the concept of a "session" that
    involves both sides for its establishment.  However, this requirement
    can be operationally challenging when the prerequisite "session" does
@@ -216,21 +217,21 @@
           +--rw (interval-config-type)?
              +--:(tx-rx-intervals)
              |  +--rw desired-min-tx-interval?    uint32
              |  +--rw required-min-rx-interval?   uint32
              +--:(single-interval) {single-minimum-interval}?
                 +--rw min-interval?               uint32
      augment /rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols
                /rt:control-plane-protocol/bfd:bfd/bfd-ip-sh:ip-sh
                /bfd-ip-sh:interfaces:
        +--rw unsolicited {bfd-unsol:unsolicited-params-per-interface}?
-          +--rw enabled                           boolean
+          +--rw enabled?                          boolean
           +--rw local-multiplier?                 multiplier
           +--rw (interval-config-type)?
              +--:(tx-rx-intervals)
              |  +--rw desired-min-tx-interval?    uint32
              |  +--rw required-min-rx-interval?   uint32
              +--:(single-interval) {single-minimum-interval}?
                 +--rw min-interval?               uint32
      augment /rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols
                /rt:control-plane-protocol/bfd:bfd/bfd-ip-sh:ip-sh
                /bfd-ip-sh:sessions/bfd-ip-sh:session: