Re: Comments regarding draft-nishida-tsvwg-sctp-failover-03.txt

[Yoshifumi Nishida <[e-mail]>]

2011/8/24 Michael Tüxen <[e-mail]>:
> On Aug 24, 2011, at 12:24 PM, Yoshifumi Nishida wrote:
>
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> Thank you so much for the review.  Most points were addressed by Preethi.
>> So, I just would like to clarify one point.
>>
>> 2011/8/22 Michael Tüxen <[e-mail]>:
>>
>>>
>>>   o  When the sender receives an heartbeat ACK from a PF destination,
>>>      the sender clears the destination's error counter and transitions
>>>      the PF destination back to active state.  This state transition
>>>      MUST NOT be notified to the ULP unless it is explicitly requested.
>>>      This destination's cwnd is set to 1 MTU (TODO: or 2?  Needs more
>>>      text discussing rationale; can revisit later?)
>>>
>>> We don't have defined a notification. I don't see the value
>>> of it. So maybe you want to get rid of it?
>>
>> Hmm. I might miss your point, but I believe we cannot use arbitrary value..
>> Shall we refer 7.2.1 in RFC4960?
> I was not clear... I'm referring to the sentence:
>
> This state transition MUST NOT be notified to the ULP unless it
> is explicitly requested.
>
> Currently we do not have such a notification. That is why I'm asking,
> if it would be better to remove it.

Oh. I see. Make sense. Thanks for the clarification.

Regards,
--
Yoshifumi Nishida
[e-mail]