Experimental

RFC 5250 - The OSPF Opaque LSA Option

Every requirement this repository extracted from RFC 5250, the tests bound to it, and what a reader has verified about them. This summary is enrolled and gated by ./le rfc check.

Overview

Positive

what Ze has

Tested both ways77.8%7 of 9 binding obligations

a positive test proves Ze does what the requirement demands and a negative one proves it refuses what the requirement forbids

One polarity plus reason22.2%2 of 9 binding obligations

the requirement admits no counter-case, so one polarity plus a recorded reason is the whole proof available for it

One polarity, unexcused0.0%0 of 9 binding obligations

one direction is tested, the other is neither tested nor excused, and nothing states which

No test at all0.0%0 of 9 binding obligations

no test carries the requirement id, whether or not a gap states why

Proven by a recorded break0.0%0 of 19 tagged units

a red was observed once under a recorded procedure, and the unit, the claim and the producer it rested on still hash to what was recorded. The break is not re-run. A test pair is not a proof until one has been observed

Neutral

measures that are neither good news nor bad

Gated MUSTs9of 11 this summary declares

MUST-level requirements the gate HOLDS. A population, not a result: the shares beside it are what says how Ze stands

Out of scope0of 9 gated MUSTs

a {not-applicable} annotation says the obligation does not bind Ze. Scope, not coverage: it is in no share below

The 4 shares marked as a part above are the whole of the 9 obligations that bind Ze: they add to 100%. Proven by a recorded break is a share of TAGGED UNITS, a different population, so it is not one of them.

How to read the colors

A color names what the measure MEANS, not how well Ze scores on it. Green is a good outcome at any value, red is a bad one, and neither a population nor a scope count is an outcome, so both take no color. The number under the label is what says how far Ze has got.

Card	Tone here	Why that color
Gated MUSTs	neutral	no color: a population is a scale, and a larger one is neither good news nor bad. It is the accounting total
Out of scope	neutral	no color: an obligation that never bound Ze is neither an achievement nor a failure, and counting it either way would be a claim
Tested both ways	ok	green at every value: a test pair is the outcome this gate exists to produce, and the share under the label is what says how far Ze has got
One polarity plus reason	ok	green at every value: where no counter-case exists, one polarity IS the complete answer, and a recorded reason is what the gate demands beside it
One polarity, unexcused	ok	green at zero, RED above it: half a proof with no reason for the other half
No test at all	ok	green at zero, RED above it: a binding obligation nothing exercises is a claim with nothing behind it, whether or not a reason is stated
Proven by a recorded break	ok	green at every value: an observed break is the outcome the discrimination gate exists to produce. The denominator is TAGGED UNITS, not obligations, so this share is not one of the parts above
Audit verdicts	warn	RED on the first weak, wrong or unimplemented verdict, amber while a verdict is no longer current or a gated MUST is unjudged, green when every one is judged sound and current

At a glance

Field	Value
Public status	Experimental
Enrolment	Enrolled
Requirements	11
Gated MUST-level	9
Obligations that bind Ze	9
Not applicable, so out of scope	0
Declared gaps	0
Gated with no test	0
Nightly-only evidence	0
Test tags	19
Tagged units	19
Recorded audit verdicts	0
Discrimination records	0
Summary	`rfc/short/rfc5250.md`
Requirement shard	`rfc/requirements/rfc5250.md`
RFC text	`rfc/full/rfc5250.txt`

Enrolment

Enrolled: OSPF Opaque LSA Option (opaque LSA types 9/10/11): nine MUST-level requirements, all met (six with positive+negative tags, three single-polarity) in internal/plugins/ospf. 3-1 (opaque types 9/10/11 map to link/area/AS flooding scope), 3.1-1 (a type-9 link-local opaque LSA is stored and flooded only on its arrival interface), 3.1-3 (a type-11 AS-scope opaque LSA is not flooded into a stub area), 3.1-4 (opaque LSAs are flooded only to opaque-capable neighbors), 3.1-5 (opaque capability is learned from the DD Options O-bit, not from Hello), and 5-1 (an AS-scope opaque LSA from an unreachable originator is not usable) carry positive+negative tags. 3.1-2 (a type-10 area-scope opaque LSA is bound to and confined to its receiving area), 3-2 (the Link State ID splits into an Opaque Type octet and a 24-bit Opaque ID), and 5-2 (reachability is recomputed live, never cached) are {single-polarity: positive}.

What the public ledger says

Status: Experimental

What the ledger says is covered:

Opaque LSA framework and retention.

What the ledger says remains:

Same OSPF experimental status.

Coverage

Bucket	Count	What it counts
Positive and negative tests	7	one part of the gated population
Annotated instead of tested	2	one part of the gated population
One polarity only	0	one part of the gated population
No test and no annotation	0	one part of the gated population
Evidence that runs nightly only	0	an overlay: each of these is also counted by the part it falls in
Gated MUST-level requirements	9	every gated MUST falls in exactly one bucket above

Positive and negative tests (7): RFC5250-3-1, RFC5250-3.1-1, RFC5250-3.1-2, RFC5250-3.1-3, RFC5250-3.1-4, RFC5250-3.1-5, RFC5250-5-1

Annotated instead of tested (2): RFC5250-3-2, RFC5250-5-2

Requirements

Requirement	Level	Section	Tests
`RFC5250-3-1`	Recognize LS types 9, 10, 11 as Opaque LSAs and apply scope-specific flooding (§3, §3.1)
	MUST	3	positive`unit/verifyTestLSTypeKnownValues` positive`unit/verifyTestOpaqueScopeRouting` negative`unit/verifyTestLSTypeKnownValues` negative`unit/verifyTestOpaqueScopeRouting`
`RFC5250-3.1-1`	Type-9 LSA received on an interface other than the target interface MUST be discarded and not acknowledged (§3.1)
	MUST	3.1	positive`unit/verifyTestOpaqueType9WrongInterfaceDiscarded` negative`unit/verifyTestOpaqueType9WrongInterfaceDiscarded`
`RFC5250-3.1-2`	Type-10 LSA whose area differs from the target interface's area MUST be discarded (§3.1)
	MUST	3.1	positive`unit/verifyTestOpaqueScopeRouting` positive`unit/verifyTestOpaqueType10ConfinedToItsArea` negative`unit/verifyTestOpaqueType10ConfinedToItsArea`
`RFC5250-3.1-3`	Type-11 LSA MUST NOT be flooded into stub areas or NSSAs; received on such an interface it MUST be discarded (§3.1)
	MUST	3.1	positive`unit/verifyTestOpaqueType11StubDiscarded` negative`unit/verifyTestOpaqueType11StubDiscarded`
`RFC5250-3.1-4`	Flood Opaque LSAs only to opaque-capable neighbors (O-bit set in DD) (§3.1)
	MUST	3.1	positive`unit/verifyTestOpaqueFloodOnlyToOpaqueNeighbor` negative`unit/verifyTestOpaqueFloodOnlyToOpaqueNeighbor`
`RFC5250-3-2`	Split the Link State ID into a 1-byte Opaque Type + 3-byte Opaque ID for the LSDB key (§3, Appendix A.2)
	MUST	3	positive`unit/verifyTestOpaqueLinkStateIDSplit` negative`no test`no negative test {single-polarity}: the Link State ID split is a pure bit operation (high octet is the Opaque Type, low 24 bits the Opaque ID) with no validation or reject path, so there is no negative behavior to drive
`RFC5250-3.1-5`	Ignore the O-bit when received in packets other than Database Description packets (§3.1)
	MUST	3.1	positive`unit/verifyTestOpaqueBitIgnoredOutsideDD` negative`unit/verifyTestOpaqueBitIgnoredOutsideDD`
`RFC5250-5-1`	For type-11 LSAs, look up the originating ASBR's routing-table entry; if unreachable, do nothing with the LSA (§5)
	MUST	5	positive`unit/verifyTestOpaqueType11UnreachableOriginatorNotUsable` negative`unit/verifyTestOpaqueType11UnreachableOriginatorNotUsable`
`RFC5250-5-2`	Discontinue using all Opaque LSAs from an originator detected as unreachable (§5)
	MUST	5	positive`unit/verifyTestOpaqueType11UnreachableOriginatorNotUsable` negative`no test`no negative test {single-polarity}: reachability is recomputed from a live SPF seam on every opaque delivery (internal/plugins/ospf/opaque.go:126,243) and never cached, so a now-unreachable originator yields not-usable on the next evaluation; there is no stale-cache code path to drive a negative
`RFC5250-3.1-6`	Set the O-bit in DD packets to advertise opaque capability; SHOULD NOT set it in non-DD packets (§3.1)
	SHOULD	3.1	positive`no test`no positive test negative`no test`no negative test
`RFC5250-8-1`	Rate-limit Opaque LSA origination (>= 5 s) and acceptance (>= 1 s) (§8)
	SHOULD	8	positive`no test`no positive test negative`no test`no negative test

Gaps and untested MUSTs

RFC 5250 declares no gap, and every gated MUST it carries has a test bound to it.

Proof state

A tagged unit reads unproven where no discrimination record exists for it: nothing in this tree has been observed to break it, so the claim its tag makes is unproven.