On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 3:53 PM Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@xxxxxxx> wrote:
We only have circumstantial
evidence: none of our users have reported issues with 8967 since we
implemented Section 3.1. (Section 3.2 is implemented in BIRD but not in
babeld.)
While I share your anxiety, I am unwilling to make the protocol any more
complex than what is required in order to work well in actual deployments.
I think you and David are both reading too much into my review. I am not suggesting any protocol changes are required or even desirable. I'm suggesting that, for a document relying on observed behavior that does not match normative expectations, the justification for acceptability of the design choice should be clearly documented. A relevant data point is given in your first sentence above. Another might be a reference to literature showing only sporadic out-of-order delivery within individual flows.
But any such changes are up to you and the WG and the IETF at large. My review comments are not dispositive for IETF consensus.
Kyle
-- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
