I get it, thanks :) On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 3:31 AM, Philip Levis <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Jan 2, 2009, at 11:19 AM, Michael Schippling wrote: > > Hmm...interesting. Why would #2 happen? Message overrun? >> > > The current (2.1.0) code flushes only when a node receives a packet whose > length is longer than the FIFO (128 bytes). Older stacks would flush on > additional error conditions. > > >> >> If it was only #1 it would seem that you would have at worst >> a 1::2^16 chance of a falsely correct CRC and then an even >> smaller chance of it being the type field that was corrupted. >> > > You'd think so, but... I'm not 100% sure. There could be other things going > on in the radio stack. *shrug* If I had a free day or two I might try to get > the bottom of it. But since assuming an L2 ack implies an L3 delivery is a > bad idea to start with, I made TOSSIM keep this in account. > > >> >> That said, the chance of missing a valid ACK is much greater >> than getting a false one. >> > > Yes. False positives are rare, but they happen. > > Phil >
_______________________________________________ Tinyos-help mailing list [email protected] https://www.millennium.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinyos-help
