Hi!

Wouldn't it make sense to re-initialize bfd.LocalDiag when transitioning to Init state as well?

Section 6.8.6 describes a case when bfd.SessionState goes from Down to Init:

          If bfd.SessionState is Down
              If received State is Down
                  Set bfd.SessionState to Init

Best regards,
Glebs

On 08.02.23 19:58, John Scudder wrote:
Hi Everyone,

I plan to verify this in the near future (let’s say, Monday Feb 13) unless 
anyone objects.

Thanks,

—John

On Nov 6, 2022, at 4:27 AM, RFC Errata System<[email protected]>  wrote:

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5880,
"Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD)".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7240__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!DSW_aH2n7cYViXw08rr41mmdkcad5rzUky6aMWE1XW-uhZqqdIELlYuLQ20Sw8Z1cTiyiqHvd7VyqUJIsm_Lmg$

--------------------------------------
Type: Technical
Reported by: Jeffrey Haas<[email protected]>

Section: 6.8.1

Original Text
-------------
   bfd.LocalDiag

      The diagnostic code specifying the reason for the most recent
      change in the local session state.  This MUST be initialized to
      zero (No Diagnostic).

Corrected Text
--------------
[Proposed text]

   bfd.LocalDiag

      The diagnostic code specifying the reason for the most recent
      change in the local session state.  This MUST be initialized to
      zero (No Diagnostic).  It MUST also be re-initialized to zero
      (No Diagnostic) when the local session state transitions to Up.

Notes
-----
RFC 5880 at various points calls out setting the value of bfd.LocalDiag as part 
of state transitions.  The text defining the feature calls for it to be 
initialized to zero.  However, it doesn't define under what conditions it 
should be re-initialized to zero.

One possible place where it may be reinitialized is when the session 
transitions back to Up, indicating that prior issues may have been cleared.

Instructions:
-------------
This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.

--------------------------------------
RFC5880 (draft-ietf-bfd-base-11)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD)
Publication Date    : June 2010
Author(s)           : D. Katz, D. Ward
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
Area                : Routing
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG

Reply via email to