Michael,
Well, I could not attend today to the webex call
and I may have not been aware that a sequence number
was proposed to be used in SF0 / SFX.
Regards,
Diego
2017-09-08 12:57 GMT-03:00 Michael Richardson <[email protected]>:
>
> > We do not use sequence numbers in SF0. Why do you ask for lollipop
> > sequence scheme?
>
> Sorry, I mispoke. I'm poor ignorant guy who knows little about scheduling
> :-)
> It's about 6P not SF0... which is used in SFx.
> Xavi spoke about it in today's call.
>
> > I wondered why it was called a Lollipop Sequence Number, so I asked
> > Google,
> > and saw:
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lollipop_sequence_numbering
>
> > which says:
> > Lollipop sequence numbering was originally believed to resolve the
> > ambiguity problem in cyclic sequence numbering schemes, and was used
> in
> > OSPF version 1 for this reason. Later work showed that this was not
> the
> > case, like in the ARPANET sequence bug, and OSPF version 2 replaced
> it
> > with a linear numbering space, with special rules for what happens
> when
> > the sequence numbers reach the end of the numbering space[1].
>
> > with a link to:
> > http://www.ciscopress.com/articles/article.asp?p=24090&seqNum=4
>
> > are we sure that we are not being bitten in the same way?
>
>
> --
> Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works
> -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 6tisch mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch
>
>
--
DIEGO DUJOVNE
Profesor Asociado
Escuela de Informática y Telecomunicaciones
Facultad de IngenierÃa - Universidad Diego Portales - Chile
www.ingenieria.udp.cl
(56 2) 676 8125
_______________________________________________
6tisch mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch
