A&C bit words
vjs%rhyolite.wpd@sgi.com (Vernon Schryver) Fri, 02 February 1990 18:37 UTC
Received: from merit.edu by NRI.NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa10578; 2 Feb 90 13:37 EST
Received: Fri, 2 Feb 90 13:39:12 EST from ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU by merit.edu (5.59/1.6)
Received: from sgi.com by ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (5.61/1.41) id AA12497; Fri, 2 Feb 90 10:39:04 -0800
Received: from whizzer.sgi.com by sgi.sgi.com (5.52/891101.SGI) for @ucbvax.berkeley.edu:fddi@merit.edu id AA05621; Fri, 2 Feb 90 10:38:45 PST
Received: from rhyolite.wpd.sgi.com by whizzer.wpd.sgi.com (5.52/891101.SGI) for sgi.sgi.com!merit.edu!katz id AA23580; Fri, 2 Feb 90 10:38:35 PST
Received: by rhyolite.wpd.sgi.com (5.52/891101.SGI) for @whizzer.wpd.sgi.com:fddi@merit.edu id AA00590; Fri, 2 Feb 90 10:38:27 PST
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 1990 10:38:27 -0800
From: vjs%rhyolite.wpd@sgi.com
Message-Id: <9002021838.AA00590@rhyolite.wpd.sgi.com>
To: katz@merit.edu, DHUNT%enr.prime.com@RELAY.CS.NET, fddi@merit.edu
Subject: A&C bit words
Status: O
From talking to Doug Hunt, I was convinced that it would be good to have the RFC say something like "you may use the A&C bits, but if you do, you should be aware that a transmitting station may not see its recently transmitted packet until it has transmitted several other packets and released the token, and that bridges may do evil and dastardly things to A&C bits" (or words to that effect). I agree with the sentiments that the A&C bits are useless and stupid. However, anyone who wants should be allowed to use them, if they have the necessary mechanism to do the right thing in the face of huge ring latencies, bridges, and the rest of the evil in the world. Vernon Schryver vjs@sgi.com
- A&C bit words Vernon Schryver