Hi Roni.  Thanks for the comments and questions.

On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 3:47 AM, Roni Even <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I read the updated draft and have some initial feedback
>
>
>
> 1.       In section 5.1.3 it says " it MUST construct the  destination list
> by reversing the order of the entries on the via  list." I suggest to relax
> the MUST to SHOULD enabling other routing algorithms.
>

Good comment.  I would probably rather leave the MUST but qualify it
with something like "If using the default symmetric recursive
routing..."

> 3.       In section 5.4.2 " Three methods are defined" should be four.

Good catch.

> 2.       In section 5.3.2.5.1 " The ProbeReq message contains a list
> (potentially empty) of the pieces of status information that the requester
> would like the  responder to provide.". What is the difference between empty
> list and PING request.

Previous revisions had only PING.  Numerous people pointed out that
for many uses of PING, the overlay data is not required and PING was
being used both for connectivity checks and for overlay maintenance.
So in Dublin the wg voted to split out the overlay functionality into
a new PROBE method.

>
> 4.       In section 10.5 the draft suggests using probe to populate the
> routing table. Why probe and not Ping and if probe which information should
> be requested, it also relates to comment 2 about empty probe.
>

Interesting question.  I think that section was switched wholesale
from ping to probe.  Quite a few of those should probably be PING.
Will make a note to review those.

That chord algorithm is based on push (UPDATE) data rather than pull
(PROBE), so additional data is not required in PROBE.


> 5.       I am a bit unsure how does the destination peer know who what is
> the node-id of the source of a request.
>

Should always learn the source of the request through the message
signature (5.2.4).

Bruce



>
>
> Thanks
>
> Roni Even
>
> ________________________________
> _______________________________________________
> 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