| Re: Proposed Resolution of Issue 188: Packet ordering | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
|
From: Jari Arkko (jari.arkko |
|
| Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 12:48:50 -0600 (CST) | |
Lauri Tarkkala wrote:
Agreed.
--Jari
Like I previously said, considering the heritage of EAP, it probably is a good idea to require EAP transports to provide ordering guarantees. IF the historical
Agreed.
baggage were not to exist, I do feel that freeing the authenticator implementor from thinking about these issues by requiring a total order on all packets might be a bit heavy-handed... ;-)
Absolutely. If we didn't have the baggage, the protocol would indeed look different ;-) But we do, so...
--Jari
- Re: Proposed Resolution of Issue 188: Packet ordering, (continued)
- Re: Proposed Resolution of Issue 188: Packet ordering Jari Arkko, October 28 2003
- Re: Proposed Resolution of Issue 188: Packet ordering Lauri Tarkkala, October 29 2003
-
RE: Proposed Resolution of Issue 188: Packet ordering Pasi.Eronen, October 29 2003
-
Re: Proposed Resolution of Issue 188: Packet ordering Lauri Tarkkala, October 29 2003
- Re: Proposed Resolution of Issue 188: Packet ordering Jari Arkko, October 29 2003
-
Re: Proposed Resolution of Issue 188: Packet ordering Lauri Tarkkala, October 29 2003
Results generated by Tiger Technologies using MHonArc.