Nice job and very fast! I am happy with all the changes, but one caution... > > 4.2.3.1 should not define legacy behavior. A legacy node will not see this > > spec and cannot be influenced by what you write. So... > > > > OLD > > If a PCE receives a PCReq message containing a BU object, and the PCE > > does not understand or support the BU object, and the P bit is clear > > in the BU object header then the PCE SHOULD simply ignore the BU > > object. > > > > If the PCE does not understand the BU object, and the P bit is set in > > the BU object header, then the PCE MUST send a PCErr message > > containing a PCEP-ERROR Object with Error-Type = 3 (Unknown object) > > and Error-value = 1 (Unrecognized object class) as per [RFC5440]. > > NEW > > The behavior of a PCE that does not understand an object that it > > receives on PCReq message is defined in [RFC5440] and depends on the > > setting of the P bit in the object header (P bit clear means ignore > > the object, P but set means return an "Unknown object" error). > > END > > > [Dhruv] I have updated it as - > If the BU object is unknown/unsupported, the PCE MUST follow > procedures defined in [RFC5440]. That is, if the P bit is set, the > PCE sends a PCErr message with error type 3 or 4 (Unknown / Not > supported object) and error value 1 or 2 (unknown / unsupported > object class / object type), and the related path computation > request MUST be discarded. If the P bit is cleared, the PCE is > free to ignore the object. You still have normative language in this document to describe how an implementation that has not read this document is required to behave. I don't think that can work. I suggest s/MUST/will/. Cheers, Adrian