Subject: [issue53] How a path should be defined in Packet Redirect Message?

From: Weiming Wang <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 12:52:16 +0000

New submission from Weiming Wang <[email-masked]>:

in draft-ietf-forces-protocol-03.txt Section 6.8 Packet Redirect Message,
The operation TLV is defined as:
   
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |    Type = PAYLOAD             |               Length          |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        Path(or Sequence Number?)              |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    ~                        Redirected Data                        ~
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                                  Figure 26

   Path(or Sequence Number?):
      [Under discussion and TBD]

The question is how the Path should be defined here?

----------
category: Technical
draft: draft-ietf-forces-protocol
messages: 119
nosy: weiming
priority: Must fix
status: Text proposed
title: How a path should be defined  in Packet Redirect Message?

___________________________________________________
Forces issue tracker <[email-masked]>
<http://www.mip4.org/issues/tracker/forces/issue53>
___________________________________________________