Re: [dtn-interest] Bundle Protocol question

I thought that users would be for users of dtn implementations, rather
than users of the standards. I'll repost this here.

It's not the sdnv issue, as I'm aware of that and should be decoding
it correctly, as I do other sdnv fields.

On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 4:25 AM, Stephen Farrell
<stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> wrote:
>
> Hi Lloyd,
>
> Ensuring that drafts don't expire is the author's responsibility, and
> I've no idea where you get the "no interest from the chairs" idea, which
> is just plain wrong. And of course, reviving I-Ds these days is almost
> a NOOP, so you can relax on this one.
>
> Stephen.
>
> L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk wrote:
>> Kurtis,
>>
>> Not surprised you're having problems with the length 'field' - it's an SDNV.
>> That's described briefly in section 4.1 of RFC5050. Note the (*) in the
>> diagram
>> in section 4.5 of RFC5050.
>>
>> It was recognised that more documentation of SDNVs was needed for
>> implementers,
>> so the workgroup draft:
>> http://ietfreport.isoc.org/idref/draft-irtf-dtnrg-sdnv/
>> was adopted after:
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-eddy-dtn-sdnv-03
>> was written. But that workgroup draft has been allowed to expire, with
>> no further
>> interest expressed in it from the chairs.
>>
>> (I'd have aimed to have the SDNV draft published as an RFC before or
>> with RFC5050,
>> as the dependency is obvious.)
>>
>> hope this helps,
>>
>> L.
>>
>> <http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/><L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: dtn-interest-bounces@maillists.intel-research.net on behalf of
>> Kurtis Heimerl
>> Sent: Mon 2008-11-17 7:29
>> To: dtn-interest@maillists.intel-research.net
>> Subject: [dtn-interest] Bundle Protocol question
>>
>> Hello again DTN-interest! I've made great strides on the python DTN
>> implementation, and can send and receive smaller bundles over the
>> TCPCL.
>>
>> I've begun work on allowing for larger files. For small files, the
>> implementation was allowed to strip off the type, flags and length
>> fields from the Bundle Payload block and assume the rest is payload.
>> However, as the payload gets larger, this fails.
>>
>> I need a field that indicates the length of the payload, but it turns
>> out that the block length field of the Bundle payload block isn't
>> anything obviously correct. It seems to return 8 if the bundle is
>> small and 4096 if large. It doesn't depend on the length of the
>> payload, that much I'm certain about. This means either I'm
>> incorrectly decoding this variable, which I find unlikely due to the
>> correctness of the rest of the fields, or it's not what I thought it
>> was. Where am I supposed to get this length?
>>
>> Also, are any of the DTN implementations more readable than the
>> reference of symbian implementations? It's hard to parse those, so a
>> simpler version might lead me to unblocking myself more often.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dtn-interest mailing list
>> dtn-interest@maillists.intel-research.net
>> http://maillists.intel-research.net/mailman/listinfo/dtn-interest
>