Hi Tim
It may be worth explicitly stating that OSPFv3 is not mentioned due to it
having an R-bit defined for indicating whether a node/router can be used for
transit traffic (see Sections 2.7 and A.2 of RFC 5340).
PPE> There was an earlier discussions regarding mentioning the OSPFv3 functionality and eventually these references were removed in subsequent versions of the H-bit draft.The R-bit is not exactly the same as H-bit, even though both are used for the similar functionality, they rely on different mechanisms in the protocol.
TC> Yes, I realised the R and H-bits are different though with similar functionality. I didn’t realise only having read this draft now that the OSPFv3 text had been removed by WG consensus, in which case I am happy.
The changes were made during the review phase, IMHO the document will benefit with the addition of a reference.
I will add a sentence in the introduction mentioning that there is a similar functionality for OSPFv3 and it is achieved using the R-bit as described in RFC5340.
Thanks
Padma
-- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
