RE: SAR well tested?

You' are right. NACK is not imlemented for receiption. I did not implement it yet just
because I never met a problem with that and have other very urgent stuff.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marco Fassiotto [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 8:48 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: SAR well tested?
> 
> 
> Hello,
> I started to look into the kannel code a few days ago (very few) 
> and I am currently following the SAR implementation, finding a
> few things that need clarification (beside being a newbie on
> kannel I also happen to be a newbie on WAP).
> However, here is the question regarding the WTP responder.
> On reception of a SARed transaction, process_sar_transaction()
> adds the first invoke and the following segm-invokes to the
> list of received blocks using add_sar_transaction().
> When it is time to ACK/NAK a group (GTR=1), there is no check for a
> complete reception of all blocks in a group, and it is always
> built an ACK packet despite the fact that one of them may have been 
> lost. 
> Sending a segmented result does not seem to suffer of the same 
> problem as the state machine is prepared to receive a NAK and to
> resent the lost blocks.
> I am sure I am missing something and hope that someone can help
> shed some light.
> Thanks
> Marco
> 
> 
>