[Idr] draft-ietf-idr-error-handling-00
<bruno.decraene@orange.com> Mon, 05 December 2011 13:17 UTC
Return-Path: <bruno.decraene@orange.com>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75DF521F8BA0 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 05:17:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.249
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Lp8sA+li3IM5 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 05:17:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com [195.101.245.15]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBA7021F8B94 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 05:17:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id B27B58C0001 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 14:18:36 +0100 (CET)
Received: from ftrdsmtp2.rd.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.192.128.47]) by p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 968F38B8002 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 14:18:36 +0100 (CET)
Received: from ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.192.128.56]) by ftrdsmtp2.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 5 Dec 2011 14:17:29 +0100
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 14:17:29 +0100
Message-ID: <FE8F6A65A433A744964C65B6EDFDC24002A9FDD0@ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: draft-ietf-idr-error-handling-00
Thread-Index: AcyzUD0Xuv8TA6jEQemnW3bYz++6HA==
From: bruno.decraene@orange.com
To: idr@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Dec 2011 13:17:29.0854 (UTC) FILETIME=[3D9089E0:01CCB350]
Subject: [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-error-handling-00
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/idr>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 13:17:31 -0000
Hi, Please find below one minor editorial comment 2. Revision to Base Specification " When a path attribute in an UPDATE message is determined to be malformed, the UPDATE message containing that attribute MUST be treated as [withdraw]. In the case of an attribute which has no effect on route selection or installation, the malformed attribute MAY instead be discarded [...]." I'm not sure how much a "MAY" may overrule a "MUST". I would propose the following rewording: "When a path attribute in an UPDATE message is determined to be malformed, the UPDATE message containing that attribute MUST either be treated as withdraw or as "attribute discard". If the attribute as an effect on route selection or installation, it MUST be treated as withdraw." Regards, Bruno
- [Idr] draft-ietf-idr-error-handling-00 bruno.decraene