Subject: Current issues/status

From: "Hattig, Myron" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 17:08:55 -0700

Below are issues based on the dialogue from the last several weeks
on the ip/1394 reflector with my understanding of their status.
Please comment if your opinion of the status is different or an
issue was missed. Of the 10 issues below, we have 3 remaining open
with one of those issues, use of ARP packet from other buses, being
truely contentious.

1) Page 7 in the description of the valid bit. IP
broadcast packets are listed. I should be just IP packets.

STATUS: Closed, Peter's decision to change or not.

2) In section 6.2, remove the text "Subsequent to reassembly, the
recipient shall verify the IP header checksum of the datagram."

STATUS: Open

3) Adding the requirement that all IP devices MUST support block_bus_info.

STATUS: Closed, requirement will be added to draft.

4) Typo two figure 5's

STATUS: Closed, figure numbers will be changed.

5)  Improve the text in Section 10.6, para 2. It says:

"The owner of an existing channel mapping that wishes to
 release the mapping shall transmit an MCAP advertisement with an
expiration time at least 30 seconds in the future.

STATUS: Closed, Peter agreed to improve text. WG to review next version of
draft.

6) Add note to Table 1 on page 8 as follows:

NOTE: The maximum payload for both asynchronous and isochronous
packets at speeds of S800 and faster will be standardized by IEEE P1394b.
The values given in Table 1 are tentative and may be reduced but will not be
exceeded.

STATUS: Closed, note will be added. While some objected to the actions of
p1394b, the actions of p1394b are not regulated by the ip/1394 WG.

7) In section 10.6 add contention resolution text or reference section
10.2.

STATUS: Closed, Peter will make appropriate change.

8) I propose to add following sentence in section 7.
    The recipient SHALL discard the entire ARP packet if the least
    significant 6 bits of sender_node_ID is 0x3F.

STATUS: Open, no one objected or agreed to the change. More input
required.

9) Remove NodeID in ARP packet.

STATUS: Closed, ARP format remain unaffected by this discussion. Note
this issue is separate from issue 10).

10) Ignore ARP packets from remote buses.

STATUS: Open, no resolution in site. It is expected a poll will be required
to resolve this issue.

-myron

---

From: Hideyuki Takeda <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:53:57 +0900

Date:         Mon, 5 Oct 1998 17:08:55 -0700
From:        "Hattig, Myron" <[email-masked]>
Subject:      Current issues/status

myron> Below are issues based on the dialogue from the last several weeks
myron> on the ip/1394 reflector with my understanding of their status.
myron> Please comment if your opinion of the status is different or an
myron> issue was missed. Of the 10 issues below, we have 3 remaining open
myron> with one of those issues, use of ARP packet from other buses, being
myron> truely contentious.
myron>
myron> 4) Typo two figure 5's
myron>
myron> STATUS: Closed, figure numbers will be changed.

       three. :-)
       In Draft 11, P13  Figure 5 - ARP request/response format
                    P18  Figure 5 - MCAP message format
                    P19  Figure 5 - MCAP group address descriptor format

       Regards.