Subject: Re: [Pppext] Review of draft-bberry-rfc4938bis-00.txt

From: Frank Solensky <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 15:27:13 -0400

Sorry for the last message but it just came to my attention that there's one aspect of the draft that should be made more clear.  The way I read the draft and its predecessor, the support for PADG/C messages and PADQ messages are orthogonal to each other.  That is, if the exchange of PADR/S messages when the session is first established does not include the Credit and Credit Scale TLVs indicating PADG/C support, each side can still send PADQs.  Is this a correct interpretation?  Either way: should this be explicitly called out?