Re: [SCTP] a small correction in RFC 4960

Hi Ash,

yes, that is a (at least by me) known issue... This comes up, when you
dimension your parameters to fullfil a given path error detection  
time...

I'm not sure if we should start again an errata ID...

Best regards
Michael

On Jun 12, 2008, at 6:36 AM, Ash Kat wrote:

> Hello:
>
> 'Path.Max.Retrans' parmeters specifies the maximum number of  
> retransmission on a path before that path is marked down.
>
> Section 8.3 of RFC says:
>    When the value of this counter ""reaches"" the protocol parameter
>    'Path.Max.Retrans', the endpoint should mark the corresponding
>    destination address as inactive if it is not so marked, and may  
> also
>    optionally report to the upper layer the change of reachability of
>    this destination address.
>
> This will make the Heartbeat to be re-transmitted one count less  
> then 'Path.Max.Retrans'
>
> This is correct in Section 8.2 which says:
>    When the value in the error counter ""exceeds"" the protocol  
> parameter
>    'Path.Max.Retrans' of that destination address, the endpoint should
>    mark the destination transport address as inactive, and a
>    notification SHOULD be sent to the upper layer.
>
> So Section 8.3 should be modified and a path should be marked down  
> when error count exceeds 'Path.Max.Retrans'.
>
> Regards,
> Ashwani Kathuria
>
> Bring your gang together. Do your thing. Find your favourite Yahoo!  
> Group.