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

RE: [RPRWG] More comments on preemption




But in case RPR MAC does preemption, that responsibility has to come to 
MAC (like retry in half duplex collision cases). Or
you are suggesting to loose that packet and let TCP try it out ?

Regards,
Devendra Tripathi
VidyaWeb Inc.
Pune, India 
Tel: +91-20-433-1362

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yongbum Kim [mailto:ybkim@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 11:06 PM
> To: Devendra Tripathi; jeanlou.dupont@xxxxxxxxxxx; Raman Venkataraman
> Cc: William Dai; stds-802-17@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [RPRWG] More comments on preemption
> 
> 
> A correction, Devendra.  Ethernet does not re-transmit
> on FCS error.  IP does, after considerable ack/nack delay.
> RPR, I presume, does not keep a packet around to re-transmit
> on FCS error either.
> 
> Yong.
> 
> ============================================
> Yongbum "Yong" Kim      Direct (408)922-7502
> Technical Director      Mobile (408)887-1058
> 3151 Zanker Road        Fax    (408)922-7530
> San Jose, CA 95134      Main   (408)501-7800
> ybkim@xxxxxxxxxxxx      www.broadcom.com
> ============================================
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-stds-802-17@xxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-stds-802-17@xxxxxxxx]On
> Behalf Of Devendra Tripathi
> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 11:17 AM
> To: jeanlou.dupont@xxxxxxxxxxx; Raman Venkataraman
> Cc: William Dai; stds-802-17@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [RPRWG] More comments on preemption
> 
> 
> 
> > * Arbitrary artefacts: this type of artefact can be supported 
> by the same
> > framing methods (HDLC, 8B/10B). The HDLC layer has an "ABORT"
> > code standardized
> > for example.
> 
> Actually, this is what I thought when pre-emption was suggested first. By
> creating a CRC error (Ethernet case), we essentially re-transmit 
> the packet.
> 
> Regards,
> Tripathi.
> 
> 
> 
>