Subject: [Tsvwg] PR-SCTP updated draft

From: "Randall R. Stewart (home)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 12:00:31 -0500

Hi all:

I think I have now gotten all of the minor changes in
to the WG last call on the PR-SCTP document. Please have a
look at the html diff at:

http://www.sctp.org

under the RFC/internet draft tab  you will find at the
bottom a rfc-chgbar/diff that highlights the few
changes..

Please let me know if I got everyones comments.. I would like
to get this in so that we can move the document forward..

Thanks

R
---

Randall Stewart

_______________________________________________
tsvwg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg

---

From: Qiaobing Xie <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 13:25:58 -0500

Hi, Randy,

Some minor editorial comments:

1. The new implementation note:

"      IMPLEMENTATION NOTE: An implementation may wish to limit the
       number of duplicate FORWARD TSN'S sent by either sending a
       duplicate FORWARD TSN every other SACK or waiting a full RTT
       before sending a duplicate FORWARD TSN.
"

may read better in the following form:

"      IMPLEMENTATION NOTE: An implementation may wish to limit the
       number of duplicate FORWARD TSN chunks it sends by either only
       sending a duplicate FORWARD TSN every other SACK or waiting for
       a full RTT before sending a duplicate FORWARD TSN.
"

2. The use of "forward" and "FORWARD" is inconsistent in a couple of
places.

 - page 12, in para C4)

  "number in the forwarded TSN. ..."

  should be

  "number in the FORWARD TSN. ..."

 - page 13, in para F2)

  "for generating a forward TSN to be ..."

  should be 

  "for generating a FORWARD TSN to be ..."

I am referring to the old page numbers in -00 here but they should be
close or the same in the -01 version you are working on.

-Q

---

From: "Randall R. Stewart (home)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 14:12:27 -0500

>       a full RTT before sending a duplicate FORWARD TSN.

Sound good :>

>close or the same in the -01 version you are working on.

Since its XML I don't have page numbers :> but thats ok.. I found them
all :>>

Good catchs.. I will have put up an update with these changes on the
web site :>

R

---

From: Andreas Jungmaier <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 11:26:33 +0200

> look at the html diff at:

Hi Randy,

Rule F5 now states:
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
F5) If a decision to "abandon" a chunk is made, no matter how such
decision is made, the appropriate congestion adjustment MUST be
made as specified in RFC2960 if the chunk later would have been
marked for retransmission (e.g. T3-Timeout or Fast Retransmit).
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
That is a little bit difficult to understand, I think. Maybe:
===========================================================================
F5) If the decision to "abandon" a chunk is made, no matter how such a
decision is made, the appropriate congestion adjustment MUST be
made as specified in RFC2960 if the chunk would have been marked 
for retransmission later (e.g. either by T3-Timeout or by Fast 
Retransmit).
===========================================================================
works better ?

Regards,
Andreas

- -- 
Dipl.-Ing. Andreas Jungmaier              
Computer Networking Technology Group     
University of Duisburg-Essen                       
http://www.exp-math.uni-essen.de/~ajung   
My PGP Key-ID: D3824AC0             

My PGP Key-Fingerprint: 228C 7C2C 3381 2DD4  9998 2812 5C0B 0B04  D382 4AC0

---

From: "Randall R. Stewart (home)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 06:39:14 -0500

Andreas Jungmaier wrote:

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
Sounds fine to me :>

I will update it and put another version of the diff up on
my web site..

R

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
>
>iD8DBQE/MMnOXAsLBNOCSsARArzMAKDG7tP82MjTbY+eQUl3DI+GweDZggCgpbBM
>QGnrK1MXPgOACwRrK4QkTgo=
>=fjTY
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>