Hi Brian,
Thanks for the review. We believe that your comment is already addressed.
What you are commenting is that if R1 (in the below topology)
sends "Unrecog Notif" capability to R2 during session
initialization, which has no clue about this capability, then
the issue of R2 not understanding the capability would creep up
during session initialization.
R1---------R2
If so, then you are right about this issue. And we believe that
this issue is already addressed by the LDP capability draft
[RFC5561] section 6, as you suggested:
<snip>
to 0 otherwise. If a speaker receives a message containng unsupported
capability, it responds according to U-bit setting in the TLV. If U-
bit is 1, then speaker MUST silently ignore the Capability Parameter
and allow the session to be established. However, if U-bit is 0, then
speaker SHOULD send a Notification message to the peer before
terminating the session. The Status Code in the Status TLV of the
</snip>
Thankfully, RFC5561 is already a normative reference in our document, so, we
don't think that our document needs any changing. Please let us know if you
think otherwise. Would be glad to accommodate your suggestion.
Thanks.
Cheers,
Rajiv
PS: For everyone's reference, here is Brian's comment:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 3. Unrecognized Notification Capability
>
> An LDP speaker MAY include a Capability Parameter [LDPCap] in the
> Initialization message to inform a peer that it ignores Notification
> Messages that carry a Status TLV with a non-fatal Status Code unknown
> to it.
You use this to avoid the problem of a speaker not understanding "End-of-LIB".
But what happens if the recipient does not understand "Unrecog Notif"? Doesn't
that create a similar problem during initialization?
Actually the general design principle of silent discard should apply here,
to both these indications.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2009 5:15 PM
> To: [email protected]; General Area Review Team
> Cc: [email protected]; Adrian Farrel
> Subject: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-end-of-lib-03.txt
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
