Ok - Agreed. Thanks, Acee
On 4/18/14 6:44 PM, "prz" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> . the only reason the migration holds together without stable loops >>> is that there is an implicit assumption in the draft (I didn't see it >>> spelled out but then again I skimmed over it only) that the metric >>> advertised in TLVs and old style is always absolutely the same. I >>> suggest to spell that out strongly. >> >> It is implicit but it seems rather obvious that if one originates the >> non-extended and extended versions of the same LSA, the content MUST >> be the same. However, I can state this explicitly. >> > > agreed but then again, there are so many metrics floating in those > protocols now that if you couple them implicitly (which you do with this > draft) I don't think spelling it out cleanly and strongly hurts (given > that the whole migration in the draft only holds together under this > very assumption). > > And I never seize to be amazed what kind of stuff people build based on > RFCs and how I come to completely wrong conclusion as what they mean > when I read them (but that can be just feeble old age of mine or > intentional by authors ;-) > > --- tony > > _______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
