Let me take a look Monday.

I also noticed that you asked about test vectors back in May. I am one of the few that has a full implementation available for interoperability testing. Let's see if we can still organize one.

--Michael

On Oct 14, 2018 12:04 PM, Evgeny <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi there

I have hard time understanding the mechanism described in 10.7.4.4 (Detecting Partitioning) [1]:

> P SHOULD then send a Ping for its own Node-ID routed through B.
> If a response is received from peer S', which is not P's successor,
> then the overlay is partitioned

How is it even possible? Given the Symmetric Recursive Routing, the Ping answer will always come from node B.
I tried to grasp through the RFC about special routing rules of Ping answers, but I didn't find anything special
except the statement in 6.1.2 (Other ID) [2] which I *fail* to understand:

> The node MUST implement support for
> returning responses to a Ping or Attach request made by a Joining
> Node Attaching to its responsible peer

"made by a Joining Node At taching to its responsible peer"? What does that mean exactly? Why is "Attaching"
with a capital letter?



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

Reply via email to