IETF Logo Mail Archive

[lp-wan] need for MAX_ACK_REQUESTS?

Arun <arun@ackl.io> Wed, 19 July 2017 11:20 UTC

Return-Path: <arun@ackl.io>
X-Original-To: lp-wan@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lp-wan@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEA81131CA0 for <lp-wan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 04:20:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id W8GIGlqro-SZ for <lp-wan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 04:20:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net (relay4-d.mail.gandi.net [IPv6:2001:4b98:c:538::196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11EF9131CB4 for <lp-wan@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 04:20:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mfilter18-d.gandi.net (mfilter18-d.gandi.net [217.70.178.146]) by relay4-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0E1D1720F7; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 13:20:01 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mfilter18-d.gandi.net
Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net ([IPv6:::ffff:217.70.183.196]) by mfilter18-d.gandi.net (mfilter18-d.gandi.net [::ffff:10.0.15.180]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mBlCec4cXm7j; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 13:20:00 +0200 (CEST)
X-Originating-IP: 192.44.77.204
Received: from [192.168.1.158] (nat-asr-incub-b204.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [192.44.77.204]) (Authenticated sender: arun@acklio.com) by relay4-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5A5801720ED; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 13:19:59 +0200 (CEST)
To: Carles Gomez Montenegro <carlesgo@entel.upc.edu>
Cc: lp-wan <lp-wan@ietf.org>, BARTHEL Dominique IMT/OLPS <dominique.barthel@orange.com>
From: Arun <arun@ackl.io>
Message-ID: <f06b79ed-9b06-8ba0-79da-d091b9270d4e@ackl.io>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 13:19:49 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ejVSNIovXCng9VsClHVubUR8H91E12Sv4"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lp-wan/U1HXK5Sgy-S-HdSSEaRfXRRR8zw>
Subject: [lp-wan] need for MAX_ACK_REQUESTS?
X-BeenThere: lp-wan@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Low-Power Wide Area Networking \(LP-WAN\), also known as LPWA or Low-Rate WAN \(LR-WAN\)" <lp-wan.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lp-wan>, <mailto:lp-wan-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lp-wan/>
List-Post: <mailto:lp-wan@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lp-wan-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lp-wan>, <mailto:lp-wan-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 11:20:07 -0000

Hi Carles, all,

 Do we still need this variable MAX_ACK_REQUESTS ?
 MAX_FRAG_RETRIES is going to be the same (during retransmission we only
send the last fragment of the received bitmap which would be considered
as ACK REQUEST). correct?

 if this is already discussed in the thread of Dominique's review please
point me to the same.

thanks,

-- 

Arunprabhu Kandasamy
arun at ackl.io

2 bis rue de la Châtaigneraie
35510 Cesson-Sévigné 
France 
Phone: +33 (0)2.99.12.24.14

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email