I think we can use the definition that we have, but here is a corner case:
1) Peer sends PATH_STANDBY, path 1, sequence number 1
2) The packet containing that is delayed
3) Peer sends PATH_AVAILABLE, path 2, sequence number 2
4) The packet carrying PATH_AVAILABLE, path 2, sequence number 2 is received.
5) The delayed packet carrying PATH_STANDBY, path 1, sequence number 1 is finally received.
With the current spec, the peer is supposed to ignore the PATH_STANDBY frame, because it has received another status frame with a higher sequence number.
The global status number is fine, but I would prefer to test it by path, rather than globally.
I think we can use the definition that we have, but here is a corner case:
1) Peer sends PATH_STANDBY, path 1, sequence number 1 2) The packet containing that is delayed 3) Peer sends PATH_AVAILABLE, path 2, sequence number 2 4) The packet carrying PATH_AVAILABLE, path 2, sequence number 2 is received. 5) The delayed packet carrying PATH_STANDBY, path 1, sequence number 1 is finally received.
With the current spec, the peer is supposed to ignore the PATH_STANDBY frame, because it has received another status frame with a higher sequence number.
The global status number is fine, but I would prefer to test it by path, rather than globally.