And somewhere along the line I think we decided to do full updates and not add/delete/change type updates. Thus a preference update would need to include all the locators (and there preferences).I think this raises a synchronization issue even if we don't use indicies. If A has sent {A1, A2} to B as a locator list option in the past, and then sent {A1, A2, A3} as an update which hasn't been acknowledged yet. When A then goes and want to update the preferences and sends {A1, A2, A3} and their respective preferences, then what would happen if B hasn't seen the LLU?
LLU message exchange is reliable i.e. there should be an ack back, right? so a node should not update the preferences of a locator set of which the LLU message has not be acked imho
regards, marcelo
Would it reject/ignore the preference update? It is exactly the same issue as when using indices I think.In the indicies case we represent the locator list using a small generation number, and here we are sending the complete list of locators, but the logic to resolve being out of synch still applies.Erik