![(please configure the [header_logo] section in trac.ini)](https://www.ietf.org/images/ietflogotrans.gif)
Opened 7 years ago
#54 new defect
Associative Mapping
| Reported by: | abdussalambaryun@… | Owned by: | draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-multitopology@… |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | major | Milestone: | |
| Component: | olsrv2-multitopology | Version: | |
| Severity: | Waiting for Shepherd Writeup | Keywords: | |
| Cc: | Manet@… |
Description
The terminology is not clear for the term "map" which is replacing many elements in the router's information bases. Is the term map: a function or an information element or an associated data structure? From the definition in the terminology section the draft seems to define as a function that returns values.
The map[A->B] which A domain and B codomain are not described well, as that each type in A has only one value in B or not, or that each A must have a value in B, etc.
The above suggests to describe the term and domains.
==OLD Edit==
A Routing Set is calculated for each link metric type in
ROUTER_METRIC_TYPES. The calculation may be as for [RFC7181], except that where an element is now represented by a map, the value from the map for the selected link metric type is used. Where this is a link metric of value UNKNOWN_METRIC, that protocol Tuple is ignored for the calculation.
==New Edit==
A Routing Set is calculated for each link metric type in
ROUTER_METRIC_TYPES independently. The calculation may be as for [RFC7181], except that where an element is replaced by a map, the metric value from the map for the selected link metric type is used. Where this is a link metric of value UNKNOWN_METRIC, then the protocol Tuple is ignored for the calculation.
