Ambiguity between 3332 and 4446?

Hi All,

  I hope I have posted the question to the right group. If not, my advanced apologies and appreciate if someone could redirect me to the right group.

RFC 3332 says the following in section 4.3.4.4.1

4.3.4.4.1 IPSP Considerations (ASP Inactive)

   An IPSP may be considered in the ASP-INACTIVE state by a remote IPSP
   after an ASP Inactive or ASP Inactive Ack message has been received
   from it.

   Alternatively, an interchange of ASP Inactive messages from each end
   can be performed. This option follows the ASP state transition
   diagram and gives the additional advantage of selecting a particular
   AS to be deactivated from each end. It is especially useful when an
   IPSP is serving more than one AS. It would need four messages for
   completion.

RFC 4446 says the below for the same.

4.3.4.4.1.  IPSP Considerations (ASP Inactive)

   An IPSP may be considered in the ASP-INACTIVE state by a remote IPSP
   after an ASP Inactive or ASP Inactive Ack message has been received
   from it.

   Alternatively, when using IPSP DE model, an interchange of ASP
   Inactive messages from each end MUST be performed.  Four messages are
   needed for completion.


Assume that double exchange mode is used. If I have a 3332 implementation on one end and 4446 implementation on the other end, if the 3332 implementation chooses not to send the ASP Inactive message after it has received the ASP Inactive message from the other end (because it is not mandated by 3332, quoted as "Alternatively, an interchange of ASP Inactive messages from each end can be performed" from 3332), the 4446 will always wait for the ASP Inactive message (because it is mandated) which 3332 will never send.

Have I misunderstood or misinterpreted the clauses? Or do you think there genuinely exists an ambiguity and that both RFCs are incompatible in the above mentioned scenario?

Thanks in advance for your help.

Regards,
Chaitra