RE: [RPRWG] protection messages
I thought I should clarify that the comment I'm refering
to is one that I had submitted on D0.2 (comment #169 in the
CRD). The ad hoc refers to the group of people that met to
resolve comments on the protection clause.
-Anoop
> I had a comment that expressed concern about the delivery
> of protection notification messages.
>
> The way things are defined in D0.2, the messages are
> neither reliable nor periodic. There are no
> acknowledgments, so we are never sure that all nodes
> have seen the protection notification message.
> Sending special protection messages periodically
> increases the overhead (but even that is not specified).
> Why can't we piggyback the protection notification
> onto Type B fairness messages since they are required
> to be sent frequently in any case (typically more
> frequently than 1 msec)?
>
> The ad hoc's response to my comment says that Type B's
> are optional. This is not true. Sending of both Type A
> and Type B messages is mandatory per D0.2 and there have
> been no comments to change that behavior.
>
> -Anoop
> --
> Anoop Ghanwani - Lantern Communications - 408-521-6707
>