Subject: FSM issues - first of many discussions

From: Susan Hares <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 10:28:59 -0400

My understanding from Andrews 10-01-2002 version of the
IDR issues, is that the following issues did not reach consensus:

	4,8,10,11,18,19,24,32,32.1, 34, 39, 41, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 53

Of these issues, I believe the following are associated with the
FSM portion of the specification:

	41 - Mention the FSM Internal Timers
	46 - FSM Connection Collision Detections
  	47 - FSM - Add Explicit State Changing wording
	48 - Explicitly Defined Processing of Incomming Connections
	49 - Explicitly Define Event Generation

Please let know if any other "non-consensus" issues are related
to the state machine.

I would like to examine these issue to reach the consensus needed
for me to re-edit the base draft wording.

If you have comments associated with these issues
on the BGP FSM draft (ietf-draft-hares-statmt-02.txt) or the
BGP Peer Persistent Oscillation (ietf-draft-hares-backoff-01.txt).
associated with these issues, please clearly state which draft you
are commenting on.

Sue Hares
[email-masked]

---

From: Yakov Rekhter <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 08:55:29 -0700

Sue,

> IDR issues, is that the following issues did not reach consensus:

Just one minor correction. The most recent version of Andrew's document 
lists just the following issues on which there is no consensus:

   11) Rules for routes from Loc-RIB to Adj-RIB-Out - Section 9.1
   32) Clarify EGP Reference
   39) Redundant Sentance Fragments
   45) Consistant References to BGP Peers/Connections/Sessions
   46) FSM Connection Collision Detection
   48) Explicitly Define Processing of Incomming Connections
   53) Section 4.3 - Routes v. Destinations - Advertise
   68) Outbound Loop Detection

Subsequently (after Andrew posted his list) the consensus was
reach on issues 11, 32, 39, 45, 53 and 68.

Yakov.