Subject: Re: assert cancel messages

From: Bill Fenner <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 10:06:07 -0700

>Can a (*,G) assert can trigger (s,g) assert state machine ?

Yes, the "Receive Inferior Assert from Current Winner" event.

  Bill

---

From: "Jyotheeswara Rao Kurma" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 10:32:04 +0500

> Well, Fig 10 says that when you transition from "no info"
> to "assert loser" you have to "store the assert winner" which
> (to me) means you have to create (S,G) state because where else
> do you store the assert winner for the (S,G).  Now, this router
> joins toward the source and you have a new assert process take
> place where the metrics for (S,G) are directly compared between
> router3 and the other routers on the network.

   Assert had already happened on this interface, why again a new 
assert ? other routers should store the assertWinner as router-3 , once 
they receive (S,G) assert from router-3, after creating (S,G) assert 
state if they won't have it already (router -1 and router-3) ???    

Thanks,
Jyotheesh

---

From: "Jyotheeswara Rao Kurma" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 10:56:00 +0500

> The desired effect is for either FSM ( (*,G) or (S,G) ) to see the 
> messageas "An inferior assert from the current winner". Regardless 
> of which FSM  you are currently dealing with the assert cancel will 
>be regarded  as such if the RPT bit is set.

  "An inferior assert from the current winner" .

I guess, current winner could be different for (*,G) and (S,G) ???  If 
they are different how (S,G) assert cancel can trigger (*,G) assert 
state machine ?

Thanks,

---

From: Bill Fenner <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 09:13:18 -0700

>they are different how (S,G) assert cancel can trigger (*,G) assert 

Are we talking about something else now?  The Assert Cancel looks kind of
like a (*,G) Assert since it has the RPT bit set, but again, it triggers
either the (S,G) or (*,G) Assert state machine because it's an inferior
assert from the current winner.

  Bill