>> i suspect that a consequence of the right wing position may be that the >> Protocol Version must change if PDU Types are added or changed. > > That's a viable option. I'll leave it to others to comment whether it's > palatable to them or not.
It seems to be an overkill though! It depends on what PDU is being introduced (yes, that means a notion of mandatory and optional PDUs ;-)). PDU change, definitely! > >> this >> may imply that, on session start, when the cache receives a PDU from the >> router, it has to adjust to the router's version 'capability'. hmmmm. > > Yes, the lack of any establishment phase makes this part a little squicky. > One can either decide to tolerate the grossness, or add an explicit version > PDU exchange or similar. The latter seems nicer but might itself require a > version bump to introduce? Putting the version# in to the reserved part of the reset query PDU seems like a good start. _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
