Funny how one can understand his own question better afterward. This topic stems from section 5.3.2.1 of the base draft, 2nd paragraph:
"When a **destination** node receives a request, it MUST check that the configuration_sequence field is equal to its own ..." Here are some possible interpretations: 1) The phrase "destination node" seems to suggest that only the "ultimate" destination peer (whom the message was meant for) should check/respond/update an out-dated configuration_sequence. 2) An intermediate peer should forward a knowingly out-dated configuration_sequence number in the forwarding header. Section 5.3.2 does not say that this field should be replaced in every hop. I suggest removing the word "destination" from the above paragraph and make it clear that any request with an out-dated configuration_sequence will never go beyond its first hop (immediate neighbor). Thanks --Michael _______________________________________________ P2PSIP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
