Re: Some SEQ frame questions
Peter Hall <[email protected]> Thu, 05 Jan 2006 09:03:51 -0500
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.beep |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Francis See my comments inline > From: Francis Brosnan Blazquez <[email protected]> > Organization: Advanced Software Production Line, S.L. > Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 10:04:06 +0100 > To: Paul Lacy <[email protected]>, BEEPwg <[email protected]> > Subject: [BEEPwg] Some SEQ frame questions > > Hi there, > > Now some technical question about BEEP and SEQ frames: > > Paul [1] have reported a bug on the Vortex Library bugzilla showing > that SEQ frame are still not really supported. While making some code > to finish this area in a basic manner I've runned into the following > questions: > > 1) If a client peer wants to reduce/increase the window size for a > given channel, one might deduce that it should issue a SEQ message > with the desired new window size. Correct. But RFC3081 has an implementation guideline that says "For example, Section 4.2.2.16 of RFC1122 [5] indicates that a "receiver SHOULD NOT shrink the window, " > > This will produce that the local window size will be configured > with the new window size and a SEQ frame is set to the remote > peer. It this right? > > But, what if the remote side doesn't agree on changing requested > value for the new window size? > I cannot find an answer to this one. Read the 3 bullet points in rfc3081 3.1.2 Sending Messages 1) segment messages 2) delay until the window is large enough 3) report error to application > How it is used the ackno value for the SEQ frame received? There is nothing. > > 2) Because the purpose of the SEQ frame, it is stated that they should > have greater priority over same messages on the same channel, but, > this will break the principle "every message send on the same > channel is sent sequentially". > > If there are 10 frames waiting to be send and a SEQ frame is issued > then these messages are freezed until the SEQ frame is sent? > > Does this means that over the same channel "normal" frames are sent > sequentially but, there another queue with higher priority to send > SEQ frames generated? > > Does SEQ frames increase frame octec counting (seqno, size) or the > message counting (msgno) for a channel when the are sent and > received? No changes to the counts > > 3) It is easy to understand that any change required to the window > size for a given channel will required to produce a SEQ frame to be > sent, but if the window size doesn't change: > > It is required to keep on sending SEQ frames notifying current > status of the channel buffer? No need to keep sending them > > 4) What could happen if BEEP peer just ignore SEQ frames or don't > generate SEQ frames? This is what I have done. I'll accept the SEQ frame but I never send a SEQ frame. When I send a message I'll split the message into whatever the remote peer SEQ requested. When I receive a segmented message I'll cache the data until I received the final piece. Only after I've received the complete message do I hand it back to the application. > > Any comment would be appreciated! > > Cheers! > > [1] http://dolphin.aspl.es/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=277 > > > -- > Francis Brosnan Blazquez <[email protected]> > Advanced Software Production Line, S.L. > > _______________________________________________ > BEEPwg mailing list > [email protected] > http://drakken.dbc.mtview.ca.us/mailman/listinfo/beepwg >