Re: [Dime] Issue#32 status

Ulrich,

See comments inline.

Steve

On 2/19/14 9:33 AM, Wiehe, Ulrich (NSN - DE/Munich) wrote:
> #32: Sequence-Number Time-Stamp values within OC-OLR
>  
> I understand that we agreed the following principles:
>  
> Sequence-Number is of type Time, however the value need not correspond
> to the point in time of generation.
SRD> I don't agree that the type should be time.  It should be of type
Unsigned64.  A time stamp can be inserted into it but we should not
prevent simple sequence numbers.  I agree with the remainder of the
statement.
>  
> When generated, a new sequence number must be  greater than any
> sequence number previously generated by the same node (including over
> a reboot of that node)
SRD> Agreed
>  
> When received, a sequence number is used to detect
> outdates/replays/freshness.
SRD> Agreed
>  
> Sequence numbers of expired OLRs MUST NOT be remembered by reacting nodes.
SRD> Agreed
>  
>  
> I did not understand the requirement for globally uniqueness as
> introduced by Jouni.
> Can Jouni please explain.
>  
> Ulrich
>  
>  
>  
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> DiME mailing list
> DiME@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime