Re: [[e-mail]: Re: BGP4 stuff: Local Preference Computation]

["John G. Scudder" <[e-mail]>]

At 6:27 PM -0400 9/5/96, Curtis Villamizar wrote:
>It's interesting that we came up with similar suggestions, both
>involving defining mandatory and discretionary separately.
>
>Unfortunately we're stuck with these two bit in the attribute,
>well-known/optional, and mandatory/discretionary.  However we
>wordsmith this we want to end up with the same value in the two bits
>so we don't affect interoperability.

I don't follow.  There are just four flag bits:

Bit 0:  Optional/Well-Known
Bit 1:  Transitive/Non-Transitive
Bit 2:  Partial/(not)
Bit 3:  Extended Length/(not)

(Note that the def'n of bit 1 says "For well-known attributes, the
Transitive bit must be set to 1."  But, LOCAL_PREF is both well-known (per
the RFC) and clearly not transitive.  So I think that the quoted sentence
should be deleted.)

There isn't a flag for mandatory/discretionary (not even sort-of), so I'm
not worried about changing (or deleting) the term.

I think that the bits do not in fact say anything about whether an
attribute is mandatory or not.  Well-known I take to mean whether the
attribute is required to be supported.  Transitive is what it says.

So I think that textual changes can fix this problem.

By the way, the path attribute def'ns in 4.3 also cunningly don't mention
whether they are transitive or not (I guess it is supposed to be
"obvious").

Regards,

--John

--
John Scudder                        email:  [e-mail]
Internet Engineering Group, LLC     phone:  [phone]
122 S. Main, Suite 280              fax:    [phone]
Ann Arbor, MI  41804                www:    http://www.ieng.com