On 21/10/2016 02:02, Michael Richardson wrote:
> 
> 
> 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.

Yes, except that B increased its offer from $56 to $84.

> As do lines 3 and 6.

Yes, except that A reduced its request from $294 to $235

> 
>     > 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?

Well, that is B telling A "hang on for 20.9 seconds", so A will extend its
timeout on the current negotiation step. It's an optional message. My test
rig decides at random when to insert it.

There's a state machine at each end which is specific for this particular
objective. I'm a little confused about what's confusing you. (Maybe the
Appendix of examples needs explanatory text?)

   Brian

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

Reply via email to