On 9/5/17 12:18, Julien Meuric wrote:
On the former, we must not forget that:
- the use of PCNtf is consistent with the overload case in RFC 5440,
- draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce passed IESG review (as well as previous WG
and IETF LCs),
- draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce has early allocated codepoints.
As a result, the PCNtf is not an open question in the current case.
(snip)
Hi again Julien,
Thanks for reminding me of the specific question and sorry for diverging
in multiple ways :) In view of your further comments and draft
constraints, my preference remains as follows:
I still consider not being able to complete sync as a serious error and
I would suggest a MUST close the session, regardless of the actual
message to indicate such failure.
Thanks
R.
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
