Subject: Re: [NetLMM] #160: Timestamps vs. Sequence Numbers

From: "NetLMM" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2007 12:12:31 -0000

#160: Timestamps vs. Sequence Numbers
-----------------------------------------+----------------------------------
 Reporter:  [email-masked]  |        Owner:  [email-masked]
     Type:  technical                    |       Status:  closed                       
 Priority:  normal                       |    Milestone:  PMIPv6 base specification    
Component:  draft-ietf-netlmm-proxymip6  |   Resolution:  fixed                        
 Keywords:                               |  
-----------------------------------------+----------------------------------
Changes (by [email-masked]):

  * status:  assigned => closed
  * resolution:  => fixed

Comment:

 The working group consensus was to use time stamps as a default.  Future
 P-MIPv6 extensions may define alternative mechanisms for reordering
 prevention.

 Sri Gundavelli proposed text for a new section 5.5, "Timestamp Option for
 Message Ordering", on the mailing list on August 25, 2007.  With some
 modifications that were agreed upon on the mailing list, this solves this
 issue for now.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/netlmm/trac/ticket/160#comment:2>
NetLMM <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/netlmm/>

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