Re: Timer Manipulation

[Vishwas Manral <vishwas.ietf at gmail.com>]

Hi Shahram,

If I understand you right, you are correct. I raised this issue on the
list about what needs to be done when both sides change parameters
symultaneously.

It seems we will put this in a later version of the RFC.

Thanks,
Vishwas

On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 2:14 PM, Shahram Davari<davari at broadcom.com> wrote:
> Hi Satyam,
>
> But section 6.5 says " A BFD Control packet MUST NOT have both the Poll (P)
> and Final (F) bits set.".
>
> Regards,
> Shahram
> ________________________________
> From: Satyam Sinha [mailto:satyamsinha at live.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 1:57 PM
> To: Shahram Davari; rtg-bfd at ietf.org
> Subject: RE: Timer Manipulation
>
> Hi Shahram,
>
> The MAY here means that BFD allows an endpoint to set both (P) and (F) bits
> together in the same packet. The endpoint "MAY" initiate the poll sequence
> even while it is responding to a poll sequence. It is not mandatory for it
> to wait for the poll sequence to complete before initiating it's own poll
> sequence.
>
> In case of change in local parameters while the endpoint is receiving a poll
> sequence, the endpoint could either use new parameters and set both (P) &
> (F) bits or use old parameters with only the (F) bit set and then start a
> poll sequence following the final transmissions. In both cases the endpoint
> has to wait for a Final packet from the other end.
>
> Regards,
>
> Satyam
>
> ________________________________
> From: davari at broadcom.com
> To: rtg-bfd at ietf.org
> Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 12:44:24 -0700
> Subject: Timer Manipulation
>
> Hi,
>
> Section 6.8.3 of base draft says :
>
> "If either bfd.DesiredMinTxInterval is changed or bfd.RequiredMinRxInterval
> is changed, a Poll Sequence MUST be initiated (see section 6.5). If the
> timing is such that a system receiving a Poll Sequence wishes to change the
> parameters described in this paragraph, the new parameter values MAY be
> carried in packets with the Final (F) bit set, even if the Poll Sequence has
> not yet been sent."
>
> It seems that the above mentioned MAY requirement is not a good idea,
> because if a Poll receiver updates any parameter in the Final packet, then
> how can the Poll receiver verify that those Parameters are Received by the
> Poll sender?
>
> Regards,
> Shahram
>
> ________________________________
> Get your vacation photos on your phone! Click here.