Subject: RFC1795 queries

From: "Peter W. Gayek" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 96 11:02:12 EST

Sivakumar,
I embedded some responses below.
Peter Gayek
IBM Corp.
>----- AIWDLSW DIGEST appended at 13:40:47 on 96/01/25 GMT (by NSAECHO at RALVM6)
>Subject: RFC1795 queries
>From: Future1 <[email-masked]>
>Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 08:41:07 -0500
>Reply-To: [email-masked]
>Message-Id: <55960125133355/[email-masked]>
>Errors-To: [email-masked]
>Originator: [email-masked]
>X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
>X-Comment:  DLSw
>
>Hi,
>   We would like to get clarified on the following issues regarding
>RFC1795.
>
>1. When an 1795 implementation communicates with a 1434+ or another
>1795 implementation the object dlswTConnOperPartnerVersion will be a
>string of non-zero length. In this case how to differentiate between
>1434+ and 1795?

The object description says that 1434 partners and those that haven't
yet done capex would have a zero length for this object.  See section
3.5.3.4 for how to use this information.

>
>2. Consider the case where a 1795 implementation communicates with a
>1434+ implementation. Both the partners can adopt either Adaptive or
>fixed pacing for flow control. How will the DLSw nodes determine the
>type of flow control supported by the partner. (There is no provision
>in CAPex exchanges for differentiating between these two)?

By definition, 1434+ boxes do not do adaptive or fixed pacing.  They
send ENTER_BUSY and EXIT_BUSY SSP messages.  To support connections
to 1434+ boxes, a 1795 product must support receiving these two
messages, and must not do pacing with that kind of partner.

>
>3. Where can we get obtain information regarding scalability?
>

Subscribe to the aiw-dlsw-scalability mailing list, and look at its
corresponding archive file.  I would start with the AIW home page
to get to all this stuff and see how to subscribe.  The URL is:
    http://www.raleigh.ibm.com/app/aiwhome.htm

The scalability list hasn't been active much, but the archive refers
to a file on the ftp server with the current scalability proposal under
consideration.  You might notice also that there is a mailing list
specifically for MIB issues.

>With Best Regards,
>>From Sivakumar G, Future Software.
>
>Sivakumar G,
>Future Software Pvt. Ltd.
>E-mail : [email-masked]
>Phone  : +91-44-4342166
>Fax    : +91-44-4344157
>