Subject: [ippm] Re: Fetch client doubt

From: stanislav shalunov <[email-masked]>
Date: 11 Dec 2003 17:05:58 -0500

René Serral <[email-masked]> writes:

> Hi, I'm a PhD student at UPC (Spain), we are starting an
> implementation of OWAMP.

Great!  Keep us posted on your progress and let's test
interoperability when you have running code.

> I don't know if this is the correct list for sending my question, anyway:

I am copying [email-masked] in my reply.  Since this is a specification
issue rather than something that's specific to our particular
implementation of OWAMP, the IPPM list is probably the right place to
discuss it -- or it should at least be copied.

> I have a doubt about the point 5.3 (creation of test sessions) in
> the draft.  My problem is that I don't know if the Schedule slots
> have to be sent with the same message than the Request-Session
> message. Or it can be sent in different messages. Maybe it doesn't
> matters?

The Request-Session command described in section 5.3 completely
describes the session that's being requested, providing the server
with all the information it needs to decide whether to grant the
request.  I'm not sure what would be the purpose of splitting the
request into separate messages?  The downsides would include: (i) an
extra RTT before anything useful happens and (ii) slightly more
complexity.  What would be the upsides?

-- 
Stanislav Shalunov		http://www.internet2.edu/~shalunov/

_______________________________________________
ippm mailing list
[email-masked] 
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm

---

From: stanislav shalunov <[email-masked]>
Date: 11 Dec 2003 17:05:58 -0500

---

From: "Jeff W. Boote" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 07:57:48 -0700

René Serral wrote:
> The point was that when the number of slots is very big you'll need various
> phisical packets. Its only a matter of implementation only, we are trying to
> program the code as much compatible as we can.

Since this is a tcp connection, the number of physical packets should be
hidden from most implementations by the tcp layer. So, I don't think it
should matter to an OWAMP implementation.

jeff

---

From: "Jeff W. Boote" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 07:57:48 -0700

jeff

---

From: René Serral <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 10:10:37 +0100

Comments below

> discuss it -- or it should at least be copied.

Oh! good I didn't know where to send my request.

Thanks for the answer.

Best regards,
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
 René Serral                 Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya
 [email-masked]
 UPC Campus Nord, Ed. D4    Tel: +34 934 017 432
 Barcelona 08034
 ---------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: René Serral <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 10:10:37 +0100

Comments below

Thanks for the answer.

Best regards,