From rtg-bfd-bounces@ietf.org Wed May 02 18:19:53 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HjNAs-0000Ny-QU; Wed, 02 May 2007 18:19:50 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HjNAr-0000Nt-Ka for rtg-bfd@ietf.org; Wed, 02 May 2007 18:19:49 -0400 Received: from fncnmp03.fnc.fujitsu.com ([168.127.0.56]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HjNAq-0006hu-9f for rtg-bfd@ietf.org; Wed, 02 May 2007 18:19:49 -0400 Received: from rchemx01.fnc.net.local ([168.127.134.104]) by fncnmp01.fnc.fujitsu.com with ESMTP; 02 May 2007 17:19:42 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: i="4.14,482,1170655200"; d="scan'208,217"; a="126591105:sNHT41188848" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C78D07.FBD91175" Date: Wed, 2 May 2007 17:19:43 -0500 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Use and Definition of Path Down Diagnostic Code Thread-Index: AceNB/vMrLrlcyK6S5eiz0/ciBTm/w== From: "O'Connor, Don" To: , X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 9a2be21919e71dc6faef12b370c4ecf5 Cc: Subject: Use and Definition of Path Down Diagnostic Code X-BeenThere: rtg-bfd@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "RTG Area: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection DT" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: rtg-bfd-bounces@ietf.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C78D07.FBD91175 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dave I have a question of clarification on the use and definition of the Path = Down Diagnostic Code Is this code only used for the case of "If signaling is received from outside BFD that the underlying path has = failed, an implementation MAY administratively disable the session with = the diagnostic Path Down." The definition of Concatenated Path Down=20 "Concatenated Path Down and Reverse Concatenated Path Down. The first = propagates forward path failures (in which the concatenated path fails = in the direction toward the interworking system) implies that Concatenated Path Down is a unidirectional failure = indication. So is Path Down also a unidirectional failure indication? More = specifically does receipt of a Path Down diagnostic code indicate that = the underlying path has failed in the same direction as the received = Path Down Diagnostic Code ? It may be useful to add some additional clarification of the use and = definition of Path Down to the next draft of bfd-base Regards Don ------_=_NextPart_001_01C78D07.FBD91175 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Use and Definition of Path Down Diagnostic Code

Dave

I have a question of clarification on = the use and definition of the Path Down Diagnostic Code

Is this code only used for the case = of

"If signaling is received from = outside BFD that the underlying path has failed, an implementation MAY = administratively disable the session with the diagnostic Path = Down."

The definition of Concatenated Path = Down

"Concatenated Path Down and = Reverse Concatenated Path Down.  The first propagates forward path = failures (in which the concatenated path fails in the direction toward = the interworking system)

implies that Concatenated Path Down is = a unidirectional failure indication.

So is Path Down also a unidirectional = failure indication? More specifically does receipt of a Path Down = diagnostic code indicate that the underlying path has failed in the same = direction as the received Path Down Diagnostic Code ?

It may be useful to add some additional = clarification of the use and definition of Path Down to the next draft = of bfd-base

Regards

Don


------_=_NextPart_001_01C78D07.FBD91175--