RE: [ws-rx] State tables, July 5 version and diffs from June 29 version

From
Bob Freund-Hitachi <>
Date
2006-07-06T20:59:33+00:00
ID
Thread
RE: [ws-rx] State tables, July 5 version and diffs from June 29 version
Ok,

I guess that ack req is optional too given
the MAY in the spec.

On the point of InvalidAck[msg] that is
intended to mean an acknowledgment that is invalid, not a fault message

When the invalid acknowledgement range occurs
, it causes the generation of an Invalid Acknowledgement Fault see sec 4.4

Thanks

-bob

 

 

From: Doug Davis
[mailto:] 

Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 4:26
PM

To: Bob Freund-Hitachi

Cc: Bob Freund-Hitachi; [WS-RX]

Subject: RE: [ws-rx] State tables,
July 5 version and diffs from June 29 version

 

Ah, sorry I missed the <> in the legend.  Shouldn't
AckReq be in <> then ? 

re:InvalidAck
[msg] - but isn't this an incoming msg?  When an InvalidAck msg comes in
you think it should generate an InvalidAck msg? 

-Doug

 

  
  
"Bob Freund-Hitachi"
  <> 

  
07/06/2006 04:11 PM 

  
  
  
   

    
    
To

    
    
    
Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS, "Bob
    Freund-Hitachi" <>
    

    
   

   

    
    
cc

    
    
    
"[WS-RX]"
    <> 

    
   

   

    
    
Subject

    
    
    
RE: [ws-rx] State tables, July 5 version and
    diffs from June 29 version

    
   

  
  
 

  
   

    
    
 

    
    
    
 

    
   

  
  

  
 

Comments in-line: 

  

 

From: Doug Davis
[mailto:] 

Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 3:57 PM

To: Bob Freund-Hitachi

Cc: [WS-RX]

Subject: Re: [ws-rx] State tables, July 5 version and diffs from
June 29 version 

  

More comments on the state tables: 

RMS Table: 

Why does "<CloseSequence>" have the <>'s? 

Because it is optional per Section 3.2 

In the SeqAck(final) [msg] row, I think you just can just "Process
Ack" not "Process Ack/Nack" since a final Ack can't contain a
Nack. 

  

You are correct as much as it irks me. 

InvalidAck [msg] row, I'm not sure they would generate an InvalidAckFault since
that seems to imply they may be sent in response to this msg,  I think an
'No action' is more consistent with you other cells. 

No, Spec says the fault happens (see Sec 4.4) 

Event occurs upon the receipt of the RMS of an invalid
acknowledgement range 

RMD Table: 

CloseSequence autonomously and SeqAck autonomously have <>'s

They are both optional. 

Still don't get the differ between N/A and blank.  :-) 

Blank means we don’t say anything about the combo. N/A
says we would be daft if we tried 

thanks, 

-Doug 

 

  
  
"Bob Freund-Hitachi"
  <> 

  
07/05/2006 06:02 PM 

  
  
  
 

  
   

    
    
To

    
    
    
"[WS-RX]"
    <> 

    
   

   

    
    
cc

    
    
    
  

    
   

   

    
    
Subject

    
    
    
[ws-rx] State tables, July 5 version and
    diffs from June 29 version

    
   

  
  

    

  
 

  
   

    
    
  

    
    
    
 

    
   

  
  

  
 

Changes state names from connecting/connected to creating/created

Changes xmit faults to generate failts 

Other minor references[attachment
"wsrm-1.1-spec-wd-15-ith-ST-Edits2006-07-05.doc" deleted by Doug
Davis/Raleigh/IBM] [attachment "wsrm-1.1-spec-wd-15-ith-ST-Edits2006-07-05-diffs.doc"
deleted by Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM]