Reflections on new state machine

"Chris Nogradi" <cnogradi@laurelnetworks.com> Thu, 24 March 2005 16:24 UTC

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 11:23:05 -0500
Message-ID: <44467058B41F7E4CB6305769819D5E631DF274@SHERLOCK.pit.laurelnetworks.com>
Thread-Topic: Reflections on new state machine
Thread-Index: AcUwjcIld3EUNo8LSEOjFtYUxCz1yA==
From: Chris Nogradi <cnogradi@laurelnetworks.com>
To: dkatz@juniper.net
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: rtg-bfd@ietf.org
Subject: Reflections on new state machine
Precedence: list
Sender: rtg-bfd-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: rtg-bfd-bounces@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dave,
 
section 6.7.6 of the new base document (v2) reads:
 
      If received state is AdminDown
          If bfd.SessionState is not Down
              Set bfd.LocalDiag to 3 (Neighbor signaled session down)
              Set bfd.SessionState to Down

      Else
          If bfd.SessionState is AdminDown
              Discard the packet
 
shouldn't the local state remain AdminDown even if the received state is AdminDown?
 
Two other observations:
1. we remain indefinitely in the init state if peer keeps sending down state since packet is not discarded and timer is reset
2. we remain in the up state if the peer keeps sending init state since packet is not discarded and timer is reset
The first seems to be ok but the second does not seem right?
 
Thanks,
 
Chris

Reflections on new state machine Chris Nogradi
Re: Reflections on new state machine Dave Katz
Re: Reflections on new state machine Dave Katz
Re: Reflections on new state machine Chris Nogradi
Re: Reflections on new state machine Dave Katz