Re: [Anima] GRASP M_FLOOD captured from Reggie.py -- could it be wrong?

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Sun, 13 December 2020 21:08 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 333BE3A09A4 for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 13:08:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.004
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.004 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CyWPVn6jZErd for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 13:08:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 751593A09F9 for <anima@ietf.org>; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 13:08:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.217.147] (p548dca87.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.202.135]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CvHFL4GsZzyX4; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 22:08:54 +0100 (CET)
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
Message-Id: <CDE3D418-2B5C-4AA0-98C9-E2C42B7F3DB7@tzi.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_6528B48A-C603-45BF-86AA-4F654A640B94"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.20.0.2.21\))
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2020 22:08:54 +0100
In-Reply-To: <28780.1607888637@localhost>
Cc: "Brian E. Carpenter" <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, anima@ietf.org
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
References: <28780.1607888637@localhost>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.20.0.2.21)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/jO_qvFSg5FbXTbBKbPNrJNVFwe0>
Subject: Re: [Anima] GRASP M_FLOOD captured from Reggie.py -- could it be wrong?
X-BeenThere: anima@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and Approach <anima.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/anima/>
List-Post: <mailto:anima@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2020 21:08:58 -0000

You forced me to get a bigger screen...

I don’t know what you are trying to say here:

> On 13. Dec 2020, at 20:43, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote:
> 
> I guess I'm still confused by why this is:
>  [ [objective1],[locator2-option], [objective2],[locator2-option],...]
> 
> and not:
>  [ [objective1, locator2-option], [objective2, locator2-option],...]
> 
> or maybe:
>  [ [[objective1], [locator2-option]], [[objective2], [locator2-option]],…]

An objective already is an array, so there is little point in putting array brackets around one.

[foo, bar, baz, bat, [obj1, loc1]]

Is a valid instance as is

[foo, bar, baz, bat, [obj1, loc1], [obj2, loc2]]

So the packet decode you captured is right, and the version with the added one-element array (0x81) does not match the CDDL.

(Both obj1 and loc1 are four-element arrays in your example.)

Grüße, Carsten