Subject: HPR spec

From: [email-masked] (Dave Finnie)
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 93 09:08:10 EST

Marcia,

Nice work (to all involved) on the spec. It reads well, and it looks fairly easy to
code from.

A question came to mind while I was reading it:

Type 2.1 Nodes can contain local dependent LUs, and can request ACTPU by setting
the ACTPU suppression indicator in XID 3 to 0. Is this supported between HPR-capable
nodes ? If not, perhaps a note in the spec that this bit is ignored/reserved for HPR 
connections would be beneficial.

I'll assume dependent LUs are supported for the following parts of my question.

Two HPR nodes that have Tower support will usually use RTP/NLPs to communicate, however there
is a conflict between the session addressing mechanism in FID5s, and the session addressing
of SSCP-PU and SSCP-LU sessions, which is closely tied to the FID2. Should such traffic,
therefore, use FID2, connection-oriented link protocols for these sessions ?

Should FID2's also be used for LU-LU sessions, where one of the LUs is a dependent LU.

If my assumptions are correct, perhaps a short paragraph re. this would be useful in the
document.

Regards,

Dave