RE: DRAFT Montreal minutes - X#NodeArchitecture comments

Hi Paul,

Well put. Couldn't have done it better with a room full of wordsmiths. 

Thanks,
Ken :-)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Koning [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Thursday, 17 August 2006 23:43
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: Sandars, Ken; [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: RE: [Ips] DRAFT Montreal minutes - 
> X#NodeArchitecture comments
> 
> >>>>> "Mallikarjun" == Mallikarjun C 
> <[email protected]> writes:
> 
>  Mallikarjun> Hi Ken, Can you please point me to RFC 3720 
> text that  Mallikarjun> says NotUnderstood is always an error?
> 
>  Mallikarjun> The closest I can find is in section 5.2, page 55:
> 
> Page 54, second paragraph:
> 
>    The constants "None", "Reject", "Irrelevant", and 
> "NotUnderstood" are
>    reserved and MUST ONLY be used as described here.  
> Violation of this
>    rule is a protocol error (in particular the use of "Reject",
>    "Irrelevant", and "NotUnderstood" as proposed values).
> 
> "as described here" is as responses to negotiating keys.  The 
> text already explicitly disallows their use as proposals.  
> 
> A declaration isn't exactly the same as a proposal, but it 
> certainly isn't a reply to a proposal, so by the above text 
> "NotUnderstood" is prohibited. 
> 
> The 3720 bug is this: an implementation that doesn't 
> understand a key doesn't know whether that key is declarative 
> or negotiated.  If it assumes the latter it would have to 
> reply NotUnderstood.  If in fact it was a declarative key 
> then by the current text that's a protocol violation. 
> 
> A good way to fix this is to add two rules:
> 
> 1. If a key is not understood, it is assumed to be a negotiation
>    key (and a NotUnderstood reply must be sent).
> 2. If a declarative key is sent, and a reply is received from the
>    other end with that key and a value of NotUnderstood, this is
>    a protocol violation only if the key is required to be implemented.
>    If it was not required (i.e., X# keys) then a NotUnderstood
>    reply must be silently ignored.
> 
> 	 paul
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Ips mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ips