Folks
Sorry for the delay in sending this email, but I have read the draft-bhatia-manral-auth-trailer-ospfv3-01 and I have some doubts and questions. I have listed these below, together with a minor editorial nit that I noticed as I went through the draft. Please let me know your thoughts. Regards Alan Alan Davey Software Engineer, Network Technologies Division Metaswitch Networks [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> +44 (0) 20 8366 1177 www.metaswitch.com<http://www.metaswitch.com/> Comments and questions. 1. Section 2.1 AT-Bit in Options Field, states that "OSPFv3 routers MUST set the AT-bit in OSPFv3 Hello and Database Description packets to indicate that the OSPFv3 router will include the authentication trailer in all OSPFv3 packets on the link". I would expect that local configuration would indicate that the authentication trailer must be included in all OSPFv3 packets on the link. Use of the authentication trailer would not be a matter for negotiation between OSPFv3 neighbors, as was mentioned in previous emails on the subject. Do you agree? 2. In fact I have a doubt as to whether the AT-bit is required. Can the presence or otherwise of the authentication trailer provide the same meaning as an AT-bit? 3. Section 2.2, paragraph 2; s/its/it is/
_______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
