On Thursday, August 19, 2021, 04:43:33 PM EDT, Michael Richardson
wrote:
On 2021-08-15 11:22 a.m., Reshad Rahman via Datatracker wrote:
> It was correctly pointed out that the enumeration for "leaf assertion" in
> RFC8366 can not be augmented. If my understanding is correct, there is a
>
I agree with Michael, this side discussion belongs on the list:
On 23-Aug-21 03:54, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> {feel free to reply to the list, or tell me to}
>
> Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> >> Toerless Eckert wrote:
> >> > One of things i feel missing in my proposed drafts for
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> > (1) Flooding (M_FLOOD) messages. These are UDP multicasts, so in effect
>> > all nodes must agree on the same maximum size. To send messages above
>> > the present limit, the maximum flood message size would have to be
One point in line:
On 22-Aug-21 10:43, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> > (1) Flooding (M_FLOOD) messages. These are UDP multicasts, so in effect
> > all nodes must agree on the same maximum size. To send messages above
> > the present limit, the maximum
On 23-Aug-21 12:26, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> >> Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> >> > (1) Flooding (M_FLOOD) messages. These are UDP multicasts, so in
> effect
> >> > all nodes must agree on the same maximum size. To send messages above
> >> > the
