In line
Henning Schulzrinne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 10/25/2007 11:01:40 PM: > Keith asked me to review the draft; here are a few quick comments: > Why priority values that are even only? Priority values are completely arbitrary. If you wanted to, you could have priority values YP17 42 -Pi i e > > The wording is somewhat redundant, with the same information repeated > three times, but in slightly different ways. In particular, the > notion of non-preemption across namespaces seems to be couched in > caveats. It seems that preemption across namespaces is sometimes > permitted and sometimes not, which makes it rather difficult to build > an implementation for the namespace without either a lot of > configuration options or special software versions for each policy. > We have seen in other areas that excessive configurability leads to > interoperability problems and code complexity. I have a hard time > picturing how to build such a configurable system without a monster > language and all kinds of strange interactions. What happens if > namespace 30 can preempt namespace 28, and vice versa? What about > circular preemption chains (30 -> 17 -> 10)? In those cases, do > namespaces have absolute priority, i.e., any priority in 30 beats any > priority in 28? You'd have to create a matrix with 250 by 250 entries > I guess I am reading it somewhat differently from you. I read nothing that suggests that one namespace (as a whole)can preempt another namespace. In fact that is explicitly forbidden. What is discussed as a possibility (consistent with RFC 4412)is making two or more namespaces "equivalent". For instance, if you make dsn-000001 and dsn-00000A "equivalent" then dsn-000001.0 and dsn-00000A.0 would be completely equal in priority. Similarly dsn-000001.8 and dsn-00000A.8 would be completely equivalent in priority. In this case dsn-000001.0 could neither preempt, not be preempted by, dsn-00000A.0. But dsn-000001.0 could be preempted by EITHER dsn-000001.8 OR by dsn-00000A.8. And dsn-000001.8 neither preempt, not be preempted by, dsn-00000A.8. But dsn-000001.8 could preempt EITHER dsn-000001.0 OR dsn-00000A.0 Janet > > > Henning > > > _______________________________________________ > Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip > This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol > Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip > Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
_______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
