RE: [Isis-wg] Another draft-ietf-isis-restart-02 question

At 16:41 09/01/2003 -0800, Ravindra Sunkad wrote:
>Paragraph 4 of section 4.2 in draft-ietf-isis-restart-02 reads:
>
>"As LSPs are received (by the normal operation of the update process)
>  over any interface, the corresponding LSPID entry is removed (it is
>  also removed if the LSP had arrived before the CSNP containing the
>  reference). When an LSPID has been held in the list for its
>  indicated remaining lifetime, it is removed from the list. When the
>  list of LSPIDs becomes empty, the timer T2 is cancelled."
>
>Shouldn't the last sentence in above paragraph instead be:
>
>"When the list of LSPIDs is empty, and a complete set of CSNP(s) and a
>restart acknowledgement have been received over all the interfaces that
>have an adjacency at this level, the timer T2 is cancelled."

Well, strictly, yes it should.

But it would be better to say

"When the list of LSPIDs is empty, and T1 has been cancelled for all the 
interfaces that
have an adjacency at this level, the timer T2 is cancelled."

Because we may have given up on getting an ack from some adjacencies (and 
hence cancelled T1 according to the pre-penultimate paragraph of clause 4.2

         Mike

>Thanks,
>Ravi
>_______________________________________________
>Isis-wg mailing list
>Isis-wg@ietf.org
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg

_______________________________________________
Isis-wg mailing list
Isis-wg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg