From 34827af35625902326811e0061d9f2858bb89d9d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Randy Bush Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2022 11:39:56 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] lars nits --- draft-ietf-sidrops-rov-no-rr.xml | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/draft-ietf-sidrops-rov-no-rr.xml b/draft-ietf-sidrops-rov-no-rr.xml index cb6520b..0a7bb31 100644 --- a/draft-ietf-sidrops-rov-no-rr.xml +++ b/draft-ietf-sidrops-rov-no-rr.xml @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ q Refresh to its neighbors because it has received new RPKI data. might be covered by these new RPKI data. This will be perceived as rude by those neighbors as it passes a serious resource burden on to them. This document recommends implementations keep and - mark paths affected by RPKI-based policy so Route Refresh is no + mark paths affected by RPKI-based policy, so Route Refresh is no longer needed. @@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ q Refresh to its neighbors because it has received new RPKI data. BGP speaker implementations have been found which, when receiving new RPKI data (VRPs, see ) issue a BGP Route Refresh to all sending - BGP peers so that it can reevaluate the received paths aginst the + BGP peers so that it can reevaluate the received paths against the new data. @@ -193,7 +193,7 @@ q Refresh to its neighbors because it has received new RPKI data. If new RPKI data arrive which invalidate the best route, and the BGP speaker did not keep all alternatives, then it MUST issue a - route refresh so those alternatives may be evaluated for best + route refresh, so those alternatives may be evaluated for best route.