On Mar 3, 2009, at 12:44 PM, Robert Raszuk wrote:
Hi John, It's so great to be in sync ! > To reiterate, "silent update drop" isn't the intent of the draft and > we'll strive to make this even clearer in the next version.I would just propose a one sentence to be added to make it cristal clear ..."If due to an errors, including those propagated in transitive attributes, the other attributes of the update message can not be correctly parsed the entire update is considered invalid and procedures of [RFC4271] continue to apply.
I'll add that or something like it.
that would clearly contradict with the text below which perhaps needs to be re-edited a bit too.>> The draft says: "In any case, an error in an optional transitive >> attribute whose Partial bit is set MUST NOT be responded to by >> sending a NOTIFICATION message or resetting the BGP session."
I think your concern would be addressed by a simple change: s/in/ limited to/, so: "In any case, an error limited to an optional transitive attribute whose Partial bit is set MUST NOT be responded to by sending a NOTIFICATION message or resetting the BGP session." Agree?
Thanks, --John