Subject: RE: [rddp] [Re:] comment clause 5

From: "Shah, Hemal" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 12:30:20 -0800

Barry,

I have a correction to one of my comments. See below.

Hemal

3 Editorial, Low, 5 under clause 9
 
Is:
 
   9.  For a specific LLP Stream, the LLP MUST provide a mechanism to 
       indicate that the LLP Stream has been gracefully torn down. For 
       a specific LLP Connection, the LLP MUST provide a mechanism to 
       indicate that the LLP Connection has been gracefully torn down. 
       Note that if the LLP does not allow an LLP Stream to be torn 
       down independently of the LLP Connection, the above requirements 
       allow the LLP to notify DDP of both events at the same time. 
Suggest:
   9.  For a specific LLP stream, the LLP MUST provide a mechanism to 
       indicate that the LLP stream has been gracefully torn down.
       Note that if the LLP does not allow an LLP stream to be torn 
       down independently of the LLP connection, the above requirements 
       allow the LLP to notify DDP of both events at the same time.
 
Changes: Removed duplicated sentence and changed capitalization.
[hvs] Change is accepted.
[Shah, Hemal] Looking at it carefully, I think they are not duplicated
sentences as the first one covers LLP Stream and the second one covers
LLP connection. So, I will not make this change.