Re: iSCSI: Towards Urgent Pointer Consensus

["Randall R. Stewart" <randall@stewart.chicago.il.us>]

Black_David@emc.com wrote:
> - I want to specifically thank and encourage Randall
>         Stewart and Dick Gahan for working through some
>         of the details of how well the mechanism is
>         likely to work and what's at stake in specific
>         situations.  This sort of detailed analysis is
>         useful in illuminating the value/utility of
>         proposed mechanisms such as this one.


David:

Don't thank me yet... I have not really analyzed this 
enough... I have some cycles free tommorrow and I want
to start digging through several TCP stack to get an
idea how the urgent pointer is implemented on both
the send and receive side...

Julian as pointed out to me that I may be getting the
URG and PUSH bits confused in my musing this weekend... I
want to dig through the code and get a real idea on how 
three seperate implemenations have handled this URG bit. If
Julian is correct I can live with the SHOULD... however I
want to reserve that judgment until I can finish digging
through a bit of code... I don't want a SHOULD specifying something
that may not work reliably....

R
-- 
Randall R. Stewart
randall@stewart.chicago.il.us or rrs@cisco.com
815-342-5222 (cell) 815-477-2127 (work)