On 4/13/16, 4:14 PM, "Paul Jakma" <p...@jakma.org> wrote:
>On Wed, 13 Apr 2016, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > >> Are you familiar with the requirements language? While the use of >> “should not” is unfortunate, it is not normative. To be normative it >> would need to be “SHOULD NOT”. > >Capitals are not required. This is not my convention - please see RFC 2119. >If one is used to RFC2328, one would not >expect normative language to be shouty. > >> Furthermore, RFC 6987 is informational as opposed to standards track. >> Finally, the document goes on to precisely state the behavior (refer >> to the last paragraph of section 4). > >> I believe the above is clear. > >Sure, 4 reads the other way but "deployment considerations" . I'm not >saying how it must be read, just saying it is possible to read the >stronger language of 3 another way. > >I'm not trying to argue, I'm trying to explain why we are here. One of the authors or myself will write an errata to clarify this definition. > >>> For the RFC6987 desired behaviour, any high metric other than 0xffff >>> will universally work. >> >> You have misinterpreted it. > >I may have misinterpreted RFC6987, sure. > >However, it is a fact that the behaviour desired by RFC6987 can be >universally achieved with metrics of 0xfffe or lower. That was true >before any misinterpretation, and is still true now. But the OSPF stub router functionality is achieved using 0xffff, so your proposal is NOT backward compatible. > >0xffff today will not universally be recognised as meaning "you can >still calculate transit paths out of a router using that link". There will always be software bugs and these should be corrected. > 0xfffe >or below will. See above - this is not backward compatible. > >That is the reality today. The reality is that the standards WILL NOT change to match your interpretation. If you want to change the standard, we look forward to your proposal in draft form with backward compatibility for the implementations with the correct interpretation. Thanks, Acee > >regards, >-- >Paul Jakma p...@jakma.org @pjakma Key ID: 64A2FF6A >Fortune: >Even a blind pig stumbles upon a few acorns. _______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list OSPF@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
