I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please wait for direction from your
document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft.

For more information, please see the FAQ at

<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-bfd-vxlan-??
Reviewer: Erik Kline
Review Date: 2019-12-16
IETF LC End Date: None
IESG Telechat date: 2019-12-19

Summary:

-09 addresses my concerns from -07.  Thank you for this.

The one "nit" is that it seems to have introduced a recommendation to use ::ffff:7f00:0/104 as an IPv6 loopback prefix.  (a) This document should follow the format recommendations of RFC 5952 section 4.3 and lowercase the "F"s.  But (b) more importantly, I'm not sure how implementations may treats this space.

The use of an RFC4291 section-2.5.5.2 mapped v4 address doesn't necessarily make the packet a part of an IPv6 connection.  Nevertheless, I'm not sure I have a strong feeling about this as it may still exercise enough of the IPv6 stack in a VTEP.

I definitely do think that in the case of BFD on the management VNI targeting an IPv6 link-local address of the VTEP would be better.  However, I expect that if ::ffff:127.0.0.0 does prove to have some issues in the future a -bis can be written quickly with a recommendation.

Also, Suresh may have ideas for a solution.

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments: