RE: description of recovery mechanisms

[Black_David@emc.com]

What Somesh is asking for is necessary.  We can
either put it in now, or discover it the hard
way later in interoperability testing with
considerably greater expenditure of time and
effort.

--David 

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Somesh Gupta [SMTP:someshg@yahoo.com]
> Sent:	Wednesday, March 07, 2001 10:24 PM
> To:	ips@ece.cmu.edu
> Subject:	description of recovery mechanisms
> 
> I hope David and Julian will excuse me for using the following
> sentences from the Orlando minutes.
> 
> -----------  start of quote -------------------------------
> 
> - There will be a significant connection recovery write-up,
> 	including details, procedures and examples added to the draft.
> 
> -----------  end of quote ---------------------------------
> 
> 
> As an engineer, I believe that we do need detailed and thorough
> description of the usage of all the recovery tools in the
> protocol. This ensures
> 
> 1. Determination that there are no holes. Presence of "holes"
>    will lead to the mechanisms not being used (but implemented)
> 
>    or determine that there are no holes which will lead
>    to testing nightmares.
> 
> 2. Ensure interoperability among implementations
> 
> I hope this does not sound like I am asking Julian to do
> my work for me. But it is better hashed out and debated
> in one place.
>