Hi Stephane, Thanks, I assume that it was meant to be bit-based. I looked again at the document It should be defined as 0x8. I also stated that we need to have the FORWARD_CRITICAL and DESTINATION_CRITICAL set to true, but this is not requited since the node information of the source to where the response should go is in the forwarding option.
So we just need to change the flag to 0x8 Roni > -----Original Message----- > From: stephane bryant [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > Of st?phane bryant > Sent: Monday, August 29, 2011 9:06 PM > To: Roni Even > Cc: [email protected]; 'Ning Zong' > Subject: Re: [P2PSIP] flag issue in draft-zong-p2psip-drr-00 > > Hi Roni, > > I guess i was not too clear. What i meant is much simpler: > > RESPONSE_COPY=0x03=FORWARD_CRITICAL(0x1)|DESTINATION_CRITICAL(0x2) > > Is the flags member defined in ForwardingOptions in section > 5.3.2.3 of the draft-ietf-p2psip-base-18 document > bit-based or value-based ? From the definitions in the base > document (0x1, 0x2, 0x4 are being used), it would seem > that it is bit-based. > In such a case, the current RESPONSE_COPY value, 0x03, is problematic. > > stephane > > > > On 08/26/2011 06:59 PM, Roni Even wrote: > > Hi Stephane, > > > > This is a good point the DRR draft should specify what is the > behavior if > > FORWARD_CRITICAL(0x01) or DESTINATION_CRITICAL(0x02) also appears > in the > > message. I think that the right behavior is to obey the > > FORWARD_CRITICAL(0x01)/ DESTINATION_CRITICAL(0x02) defined behavior. > > > > "If the FORWARD_CRITICAL flag is set, any node that would forward the > > message but does not understand this options MUST reject the request > with an > > error_Unsupported_Forwarding_Option error response. If the > > DESTINATION_CRITICAL flag is set, any node that generates a response > to the > > message but does not understand the forwarding option MUST reject the > > request with an Error_Unsupported_Forwarding_Option error response." > > > > I think that DRR should recommend that the RESPONSE_COPY flag SHOULD > be set > > to false while the FORWARD_CRITICAL and DESTINATION_CRITICAL SHOULD > be set > > to true. (This text appeared in > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-p2psip-base-10#page-47 > > > > Roni Even > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > >> Behalf Of st?phane bryant > >> Sent: Friday, August 26, 2011 6:19 PM > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: [P2PSIP] flag issue in draft-zong-p2psip-drr-00 > >> > >> Hello, > >> > >> I am currently working on adding wireshark dissectors > >> for the WG drafts, and i stumbled upon an issue > >> in draft-zong-p2psip-drr-00: > >> > >> In section section 6.2.1 (State-keeping Flag) it > >> defines the flag: > >> flag : 0x3 IGNORE-STATE-KEEPING > >> > >> However, this flag enters in conflict with 2 > >> predefined flags for the ForwardingOption structure: > >> FORWARD_CRITICAL(0x01), DESTINATION_CRITICAL(0x02) > >> > >> (Unless there is a semantic rule linking them, > >> implication or mutual exclusion). > >> > >> As soon as this issue will be cleared, i will > >> add the dissector. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Stephane > >> _______________________________________________ > >> P2PSIP mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip > > > > _______________________________________________ P2PSIP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
