Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote:
    > Oops, there was a prettifying bug in the previous version...

...

    > OK, so now I'll make one with multiple steps [pause while I run my
    > example generator and prettify the results]

   1> A to B: [M_REQ_NEG, 11146801, ['EX2', 1, 6, ['NZD', 393]]]
   2> B to A: [M_NEGOTIATE, 11146801, ['EX2', 1, 6, ['NZD', 56.0]]]
   3> A to B: [M_NEGOTIATE, 11146801, ['EX2', 1, 6, ['NZD', 294.75]]]
   4> B to A: [M_WAIT, 11146801, 20899]
   5> B to A: [M_NEGOTIATE, 11146801, ['EX2', 1, 6, ['NZD', 84.0]]]
   6> A to B: [M_NEGOTIATE, 11146801, ['EX2', 1, 6, ['NZD', 235.8]]]
   7> B to A: [M_END, 11146801, [O_DECLINE, 'Insufficient funds']]

Lines 2 and 5 look identical to me.
As do lines 3 and 6.

    > I use random numbers to generate the test cases. That was a nice one, it
    > shows B telling A to wait and it shows a failed negotiation. But since
    > A and B both know who they are, the fact that the session-id is identical
    > isn't a problem.

Does it work only because line 4 precedes line 5?

--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima

Reply via email to