Re: [RTG-DIR] [babel] Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-01

Being a little bit picky here:

Could you also add a sentence in section 7.1 stating explicitly that 
only one source specific prefix is permitted in a TLV?  I realize this 
is implied by the use of "a source prefix" in section 5.1.  I think it 
would help to be explicit.

If the sending side restriction is made explicit, then the text you 
propose for the receiving side is acceptable, although I would 
personally prefer that it used an upper case SHOULD for ignoring the 
whole TLV.  This preference is driven by a desire for robustness and 
predictability in interoperation.

Yours,
Joel

On 11/9/17 8:48 AM, Matthieu Boutier wrote:
>> maybe I summon the wrath of the Gods of the Internet.
> 
> Hey! What's the protocol for that? :p
> 
>> If you don't expect this to ever be useful, no need to specify it.
> 
> Looks good for me, does something like the following make sense?  Should we
> recommend something?
> 
>      A node does not expect to receive any TLV with two Source Prefix sub-TLVs or
>      more.  Whenever that occurs, the behaviour is undefined: an implementation
>      may drop the whole packet, the whole TLV or consider only just one of the
>      sub-TLVs (this can be the case if the implementation does not check if
>      multiple sub-TLVs are sent).
> 
> Toke, would you like to see: "It is recommended to ignore the whole packet".
> (lower case "recommended")
> 
> Matthieu
> 
> _______________________________________________
> babel mailing list
> babel@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel
> 