Subject: Re: Please help me for this rsvp questions, thanks

From: "Hong Liao" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 11:44:13 -0500

If you want to conform the spec, you have to follow the spec.  But since it
use the 'should', and not must, you do not have to.

You have to follow the word in the spec for all the 'should', 'must',
otherwise author does not need to put the notice for emphasizing this,
right?

Julia

                    Swayam                                                                                      
                    Prakash              To:     Hong Liao <[email-masked]>                                
                    <swvemuri@cis        cc:     [email-masked], (bcc: Hong Liao/Telcordia)                       
                    co.com>              Subject:     Re: Please help me for this rsvp questions, thanks        
                                                                                                                
                    11/06/01                                                                                    
                    10:51 PM                                                                                    

Julia,

Both the error messages are not optional, they r must. If there are no
error
messages , for eg. the sender will be forever sending path message in wrong
format ,periodically.
I feel you are looking too much into the words like 'should'.
what should means there is that if errors messages are not issued, there
should
be some other means of performing a similar action(notifying the sender
that
path message is sent in wrong format)

the definition of should itself says :

*******but the full implications must be understood and
   carefully weighed before choosing a different course.************

Any RFC is not a standard. Its upto the person whether any particular
feature
is implemented are not.
RFC gives one way of implementing, if anybody  wants to deviate from the
RFC
one should be able to see the repercussions of the same.

Others, correct me if iam wrong.

Thanks
-Swayam

Hong Liao wrote:

> Hi,
>
> PathErr/ResvErr is optional not for the RFC2205 Appendix B,
>
> For example:   rsvp spec rfc 2205 page 62
>
>             One might expect the known Class-Num to provide information
>            that could allow intelligent handling of such an object.
>            However, in practice such class-dependent handling is
>            complex, and in many cases it is not useful.
>
>            Generally, the appearance of an object with unknown C-Type
>            should result in rejection of the entire message and
>            generation of an error message (ResvErr or PathErr as
>            appropriate).  The error message will include the Class-Num
>            and C-Type that failed (see Appendix B); the end system that
>            originated the failed message may be able to use this
>            information to retry the request using a different C-Type
>            object, repeating this process until it runs out of
>            alternatives or succeeds.
>
> FRC2119
>
> SHOULD   This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there
>    may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a
>    particular item, but the full implications must be understood and
>    carefully weighed before choosing a different course.
>
> It looks like the Should means patherr or resverr is optional when the
path
> or resv message with error was sent out, the patherr or resverr is
optioanl
> to be sent back from switch.
>
> Can anyone comfirm this for me?
>
> Thanks a lot for your help.
>
> Julia