Subject: Re: For discussion: revising RFC1264

From: Jeffrey Haas <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 16:50:10 -0500

On Fri, Mar 21, 2003 at 01:11:16PM -0800, Tony Li wrote:
> |    The BGP FSM is a poor example of this for complicated reasons.
> 
> Agreed.  This probably should have been described via some other
> mechanism such as pseudo-code.

Although I'd argue that pseudo-code can be hard to prove to completely
cover all event cases.  A FSM, by definition, doesn't have this
problem.  But I'm generalizing rather than talking about our specific
icky case.

-- 
Jeff Haas 
NextHop Technologies
_______________________________________________
routing-discussion mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/routing-discussion

---

From: Jeffrey Haas <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 16:50:10 -0500

---

From: "Tony Li" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 13:11:16 -0800

mechanism
such as pseudo-code.

Tony