>> A router must be able to detect, and should be able to recover from transitive
>> data inconsistencies. Good, valid data from 1 or more sources must not
>> be combined together with existing or received data to create a destabilizing
>> effect(for some value of destabilizing) . If a router is not able to recover, it
>> must not propagate the inconsitent data if the router is a propagator of control
>> information.
> This came up in the context of the current ambiguities in the
> BGP confederatins spec.
> A syntactially correct packet, i.e. a packet that is well-formed,
> should not be the reason to tear down a peering session. If the
> packet is syntactically correct, but some portion of it is semantically
> incorrect, it should be received, ignored, logged and not propagated.
Jeff,
Thanks for the note.
I think it should be formulated explicitly in terms of
syntactic and semantic correctness, as you put it above.
Definition of "good" and "valid" is kind of vague.
Furthermore, I think this requirement should be extended
to say that not just a router, but the system should
be able to handle this correctly.
Alex.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 04 2003 - 04:10:03 EDT