Re: [802.21] Ad-hoc on ES/CS discussion
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 03:54:52PM -0800, Gupta, Vivek G wrote:
>
> >
> > Even if we consider L2 transport over a new Ethernet type, we would
> > face the same problem of "unnecessary retransmission of request that
> > has been received but taking time to process" if we don't have ACK in
> > the MIH protocol.
> [Vivek G Gupta]
> I am not saying that you don't need an ACK for such a case. Just that my
> impression was that such ACKs need to be handled at the transport level.
> For most wireless media at L2 that's already built in. For other cases
> where that's not built in, does MIH need to take care of that or shall
> that be handled by some other means? If MIH protocol needs to handle
> this then we may need to define more than just the ACK
> opcode.....retransmissions, timeouts, dealing with duplicate/redundant
> packets, etc.
Even without defining ACK, MIH protocol would need to deal with
retransmissions, timeouts, dups for request-response type
transactions.
Yoshihiro Ohba