Re: [Isis-wg] Alexey Melnikov's Discuss on draft-ietf-isis-rfc4971bis-03: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Alexey Melnikov <[e-mail]>]

Hi Alia,

On Tue, Aug 16, 2016, at 05:18 PM, Alia Atlas wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 12:16 PM, Alexey Melnikov
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> __
>> Hi Alia,
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016, at 05:03 PM, Alia Atlas wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Alexey,
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 11:43 AM, Alexey Melnikov
>>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> -----
>>>> DISCUSS:
>>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> -----
>>>>
>>>> I would like to get clarification on the following points before
>>>> recommending approval of this document:
>>>>
>>>> 1) How do multiple CAPABILITY TLVs from the same source treated, if
>>>>    they
>>>> have the same S and D flags, but different subTLV? Are the
>>>> cumulative? Or
>>>> this is not allowed?
>>>> I am sorry if I missed where this was described, let me know if
>>>> I did.
>>>
>>> The end of Section 3 says " Where a receiving system has two copies
>>> of a CAPABILITY TLV from the same system that have different
>>> settings for a given attribute, the procedure used to choose which
>>> copy shall be used is undefined."
>>>
>>
>> Ok, I wasn't sure that this was talking about the same thing.
>>
>> So just to double check: using multiple CAPABILITY TLVs with
>> different S and D flags is Ok (and described), but use of multiple
>> CAPABILITY TLVs with identical S and D flags is undefined as per the
>> sentence you quoted above?
>
> They have to have the same attribute - which could be a sub-TLV.

I don't think Les' answer agrees with yours.

The word "attribute" only occurs once in the document in the sentence
you quote.
Does "a given attribute" mean "a single sub-TLV" or "all sub-TLVs
included in a CAPABILITY TLV instance"?