The MPLS WG Archive[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index] Apparent contradiction in RSVP-TE
In RFC 3209, section 4.7.4 (Resource Affinity Procedures), what is the correct PathErr message to send out if resource affinities don't match? In the first paragraph, it says that it should be a "policy control failure" error, but it doesn't specify what policy-control subcode should be used for the error value. In the second paragraph, it says that it should be "routing problem" with a subcode of "no route available towards destination." On page 49, after the definition for the three tests, it also says that it should be "routing problem" with a subcode of "no route available towards desination." My question is: which of the two errors is correct? And if both are correct, under what circumstances should one be used instead of the other? And when "policy control failure" is used, what should tbe policy-error subcode be? RFC 2750 defines a list of subcodes, but none are applicable to resource affinities, and RFC 3209 doesn't define any new codes. -- David
|
|