Subject: Apparent contradiction in RSVP-TE

From: David Charlap <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 14:15:20 -0400

In RFC 3209, section 4.7.4 (Resource Affinity Procedures), what is the
correct PathErr message to send out if resource affinities don't match?

In the first paragraph, it says that it should be a "policy control
failure" error, but it doesn't specify what policy-control subcode
should be used for the error value.

In the second paragraph, it says that it should be "routing problem"
with a subcode of "no route available towards destination."

On page 49, after the definition for the three tests, it also says that
it should be "routing problem" with a subcode of "no route available
towards desination."

My question is: which of the two errors is correct?  And if both are
correct, under what circumstances should one be used instead of the
other?

And when "policy control failure" is used, what should tbe policy-error
subcode be?  RFC 2750 defines a list of subcodes, but none are
applicable to resource affinities, and RFC 3209 doesn't define any new
codes.

-- David

---

From: Eric Gray <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 15:33:30 -0400

David,

    The simplest answer is that policy control failure is not used.
Why don't we try using that answer?  :-)

--
Eric Gray

---

From: David Charlap <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 15:42:19 -0400

> Why don't we try using that answer?  :-)

That was my gut feeling as well.  But I want to make sure the consensus 
of this group agrees as well.

-- David