LSR WG, This Errata is also an outcome of the Flex-Algorithm discussion - is there any further comment?
Thanks, Acee On 7/5/21, 5:54 PM, "RFC Errata System" <[email protected]> wrote: The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8920, "OSPF Application-Specific Link Attributes". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6631 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Les Ginsberg <[email protected]> Section: 5 Original Text ------------- OLD If link attributes are advertised with zero-length Application Identifier Bit Masks for both standard applications and user-defined applications, then any standard application and/or any user-defined application is permitted to use that set of link attributes. If support for a new application is introduced on any node in a network in the presence of such advertisements, these advertisements are permitted to be used by the new application. If this is not what is intended, then existing advertisements MUST be readvertised with an explicit set of applications specified before a new application is introduced. An application-specific advertisement (Application Identifier Bit Mask with a matching Application Identifier Bit set) for an attribute MUST always be preferred over the advertisement of the same attribute with the zero-length Application Identifier Bit Masks for both standard applications and user-defined applications on the same link. Corrected Text -------------- NEW Link attributes MAY be advertised associated with zero-length Application Identifier Bit Masks for both standard applications and user-defined applications. Such link attribute advertisements MUST be used by standard applications and/or user defined applications when no link attribute advertisements with a non-zero-length Application Identifier Bit Mask and a matching Application Identifier Bit set are present for a given link. Otherwise, such link attribute advertisements MUST NOT be used. Notes ----- RFC 8920 defines advertising link attributes with zero length Standard Application Bit Mask (SABM) and zero length User Defined ApplicationBit Mask (UDABM) as a means of advertising link attributes that can be used by any application. However, the text uses the word "permitted", suggesting that the use of such advertisements is "optional". Such an interpretation could lead to interoperability issues and is not what was intended. The replacement text below makes explicit the specific conditions when such advertisements MUST be used and the specific conditions under which they MUST NOT be used. Instructions: ------------- This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC8920 (draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-16) -------------------------------------- Title : OSPF Application-Specific Link Attributes Publication Date : October 2020 Author(s) : P. Psenak, Ed., L. Ginsberg, W. Henderickx, J. Tantsura, J. Drake Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Link State Routing Area : Routing Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
