Subject: Re: DLSw out of hibernation

From: [email-masked] (azi)
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 94 08:19:26 -0800

Dear SIG members,

The vote of RADLINX for the February SIG meeting is as follows: 

                  Order 
                (1st,2nd...
                  or NOT)        Hours
Capabilities      __1___         __2___   
Connect           __5___         __1___
Flow control      __2___         __2___
Loop prevention   __NO__         __0___
MIB / NetView     __NO__         __0___
Conformance       __4___         __1___
Priority/COS      __3___         __1___

Regards,
			
Elazar (Azi) Ronen	
Software development manager, RADLINX Ltd.

7 Arad Street                             |     Tel: 972-3-6475188
Tel Aviv                                  |     Fax: 972-3-6475057
Israel 69710                              |     Email: [email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked] (Paul Brittain)
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 94 16:05:38 GMT

Louise,

John Palombo and I will be the Data Connection representatives at the DLSw SIG
sessions of the February AIW.  The time division betweeen the SIGlets that
seems most appropriate is as follows:

                  Order
                (1st,2nd...
                  or NOT)        Hours
Capabilities      __4___         __1__
Connect           __1___         __2__
Flow control      __2___         __2__
Loop prevention   __3___         __1__
MIB / NetView     __5=__         _____ }
Conformance       __5=__         _____ } one hour between the three
Priority/COS      __5=__         _____ }

My reasoning behind this suggestion is:

-       CONNECT is the siglet that seems to deal with all corrections/
        clarification/changes to the FSM.  As this is the central part
        of the RFC, it should probably take top priority.

-       FLOW CONTROL is the most obvious omission from the current RFC and
        discussions about flow control mechanisms always seem to take a
        long time!

-       LOOP PREVENTION was a very active SIG before XMAS, so it deserves time
        to resolve remaining issues.

-       CAPABILITIES needs to follow on from the above sessions so that we know
        what facilities we are have to negotiate in the capabilities exchange.

-       CONFORMANCE/MIB/PRIORITY all seem to be lower priorities.  I would
        be interested in hearing any ideas people have on conformance testing,
        but it seems premature to discuss the MIB or adding prioritization if
        that will limit discussion on the above topics.  However, on the
        assumption that these SIGlets may need some time, even if only to
        agree to hold off for now, let's save an hour for them.

Hope this is useful,

Paul Brittain