Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [STDS-802-16] TGd Comment 56



Title: Message
DJ,
 
Take a look at comment 63. The MAC_CHANGE_CONNECTION is replaced by MAC_CHANGE_SERVICE FLOW. Since not all service flows have CID the reference to this primitive will be done through the SFID.
 
Eyal
 
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-stds-802-16@listserv.ieee.org [mailto:owner-stds-802-16@listserv.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Johnston, Dj
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 7:17 PM
To: STDS-802-16@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: [STDS-802-16] TGd Comment 56

On the sponsor ballot I made the following comment..
 
"In the MAC service primitive definitions, the CREATE_CONNECTION primitives are replicated as the
CHANGE_CONNECTION primitives with the following declaration: "The semantics and effect of receipt
of these primitives are the same as for the corresponding CREATE
primitives, except that a new CID is not generated."
 
The CREATE_CONNECTION.request does not include a CID parameter, since the response provides the CID,
as provisioned by the MAC at the time of creation. All that is in the parameter set of the request is a set of
connection parameters.
Thus on receipt of a CHANGE_CONNECTION.request, with a new set of connection parameters, the MAC
somehow has to use the new parameter set to indentify the CID that is being changed. This is clearly impossible
if the parameters do not sufficiently match. The CHANGE_CONNECTION.request must include a CID."
 
With the loosely define remedy:
"Write a definition of the MAC_CHANGE_CONNECTION.request primitive that by duplication of or reference
to the MAC_CREATE_CONNECTION.request primitive that defines it to be the same as the
MAC_CREATE_CONNECTION.request primitive with the exception that an additional paramater 'CID' is included,
to indicate to the MAC which CID is being changed."
 
This was rejected for lack of a specific remedy. I wasn't able to be around for the discussion, so I have no sense as to whether the group agreed with the comment or whether some fault in my analysis was identified.
 
So before I rush off and write specific text, I'd like to know if people think the comment is valid.
 
Thanks,
DJ