Subject: [Idr] Error handling in draft-ietf-idr-dynamic-cap-10.txt

From: "Ilya Varlashkin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2010 11:00:25 +0100

Hi,

although draft-ietf-idr-dynamic-cap-10 contains some guidelines for
error handling, there is still possibility for having two conformant but
different implementations. Consider initiator of capability update
message requests removal (Action bit set to 1) of a capability, which
was not previously advertised. Current draft leaves it up to receiver
implementation to decide either to silently ignore such capability or to
send notification back to originator. Shouldn't behaviour in this
situation be explicitly defined as to avoid ambiguity? I think ideally
receiver of such confusing message should send undistruptive feedback,
but that would require implementation of not-yet-standardized
draft-ietf-idr-advisory. What's WG opinion on this?

Kind regards,
iLya

---

From: Enke Chen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 16:06:00 -0800

Hi, ILya:

As withdrawing a capability that was not advertised previously does not 
have any practical impact, we can specify that the capability revision 
should be ignored in that case.

Thanks.   -- Enke

On 2/1/10 2:00 AM, Ilya Varlashkin wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>