Chronological Thread 

< Chronological >      < Thread >

---

Hi,

concerning point 2.:

the corresp. code segment should be
distribution.c, line 864,
where the tag is saved.

initChunk = ((SCTP_init_fixed *) & ((SCTP_init *)
message->sctp_pdu)->init_fixed);
/* make sure, if you send an ABORT later on (i.e. when peer requests 0
streams),
* you pick the right tag */
lastInitiateTag = ntohl(initChunk->init_tag);
event_logi(VVERBOSE, "Got an INIT CHUNK with initiation-tag %u",
lastInitiateTag);

do well,

Bernward


> -----Urspr> üngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Tuexen Michael
> [SMTP:Michael.Tuexen AT icn.siemens.de]
> Gesendet am: Montag, 12. Februar 2001 17:03
> An:
> 'discussion AT sctp.de'
> Betreff: RE: [SCTP-Discussion] some questions to prototype 0.10.0
>
> Dear all,
> see my comments below.
> Best regards
> Michael
>
> Michael Tüxen Tel.: +49 89 722 47210
> Siemens AG Fax: +49 89 722 48212
> ICN WN CS SE 51 E-mail:
> Michael.Tuexen AT icn.siemens.de
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Hollaus Thomas
> > [SMTP:thomas.hollaus AT siemens.at]
> > Sent: Monday, February 12, 2001 2:33 PM
> > To:
> > 'discussion AT sctp.de'
> > Subject: [SCTP-Discussion] some questions to prototype 0.10.0
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have some questions to prototype 0.10.0:
> >
> > 1. SCTP-control.c:
> > TODO: check that in SHUTDOWN states we reset the retransmission counters,
> > any time we get a valid datagram from our peer. This must also be done for
> > SACKs, DATA, etc. we get from peer !
> > -> I have not found anything about that in the RFC or backoff document.
> > Where does that come from?
> [Tuexen Michael] I do not know. Andreas do you know a reason?
> >
> > 2. SCTP-control.c procedure scr_init line 646:
> > save a-sides init-tag from init-chunk to be used as a verification tag of
> > the sctp-message carrying the initAck (required since peer may have
> > changed
> > the verification tag).
> > mdi_writeLastInitiateTag(ch_initiateTag(initCID)); */
> > -> Why is this under comments? Why is it not necessary to save the remote
> > tag for responding? Is it stored in an other code fragment?
> >
> [Tuexen Michael] Andreas, could you answer this?
>
> > 3. Restart of peer:
> > The backoff document says that it is allowed to restart with a subset of
> > the
> > original address list. But how new number of streams should be handled? Is
> > it allowed to restart with less or more streams?
> >
> [Tuexen Michael] The number of streams should be the same
> as before. That is as least what I think. But the RFC is
> probably a bit vage on that.
> > How restart should be handled in general? Should the own side (which
> > receives the restart) discard all data in its queues and react like
> > receiving a new association setup with all data lost of previous
> > association?
> [Tuexen Michael] The transmission queue has not
> to be deleted. But that is implementation dependent.
> The rest has to be reset.
> > Currently (in prototype 0.10.0) a restart is implemented for flow control
> > and receive control. But it arises the question if that makes sense:
> > Because
> > it could happen that the remote side (which restarts) has acked data
> > chunks
> > in sctp layer but the upper layer has not yet received the datagrams from
> > sctp layer (e.g. due to crash). Flow control/Reliable transfer on the own
> > side believes that the remote side has received the datagrams and does not
> > repeat that chunks. Now the remote side has gaps and cannot detect them.
> [Tuexen Michael] This will result in data loss. This
> is indicated bt the restart indication.
>
>
> > Mit freundlichen Gruessen / Best regards
> > Thomas Hollaus
> >
> > SIEMENS AG Österreich
> > Program and Systems Engineering
> > mailto:thomas.hollaus AT siemens.at
> > http://www.siemens.at/
> > _______________________________________________
> > discussion mailing list
> > discussion AT sctp.de
> > http://www.sctp.de/mailman/listinfo/discussion
> _______________________________________________>
> discussion mailing list
> discussion AT sctp.de
> http://www.sctp.de/mailman/listinfo/discussion

---

• AW: [SCTP-Discussion] some questions to prototype 0.10.0, Meyknecht Bernward, 02/12/2001
  • <Possible follow-up(s)>
  • AW: [SCTP-Discussion] some questions to prototype 0.10.0, Hollaus Thomas, 02/13/2001

---

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19+.