Hi,
I think that the text addresses mostly the case when the destination type is
a nodeId but does not say much about the behavior when the destination type
is a resourceId  or compressed which are the other allowed destination
types.
Note that a resourceId can only be the final location in a resource list

Regards
Roni Even

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Bruce Lowekamp
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 4:00 PM
To: JiangXingFeng
Cc: 'P2PSIP WG'
Subject: Re: [P2PSIP] Vague semantics in Attach method

Jiang,

Thanks for looking at this in detail.

JiangXingFeng wrote:
...
> So I propose to make a few modifications to Attach method in RELOAD to
make
> the semantics of Attach more clear and avoid necessary connections. 
> 1. Add more text in Attach section on how to set the destination type in
the
> Attach request. resource id or node id;

I think this would be a good clarification.  I will try to add some more 
text here suggesting why you would route an Attach to a resource-id or 
to a node-id.

> 2. When the responsible peer receives the Attach request, the peer will
> check the destination type first. If the destination type is node id, the
> peer will check whether the peer's own node id equals to the destination
> node id; If they don't equal, sends a error to the sending peer and refuse
> to establish connection. 

I think this is the correct behavior, but it's actually already 
accomplished in another way.  The general routing algorithm only 
delivers messages routed to a node-id if the node-id is an exact match 
for a particular node, as described in the third bullet of 6.1.2.1 and 
clarified in the note in that section.

Bruce

_______________________________________________
P2PSIP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip

_______________________________________________
P2PSIP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip

Reply via email to