Subject: [btns] Q: How to deal with connection latch breaks?

From: Nicolas Williams <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 15:17:07 -0500

The last DISCUSS on draft-ietf-btns-connection-latching-10 concerns what
the WG thinks is the best way for ULPs to handle connection latch
transitions to the BROKEN state in the _absence_ of connection latching
APIs for applications (or when apps are not aware of such APIs).

The two options are:

a) The ULP MAY/SHOULD/MUST pretend that the equivalent of a TCP reset
   occurred and the connection latch is transition to the CLOSED state
   (and destroyed/cleaned up);

b) The ULP MAY/SHOULD/MUST act as though bits aren't moving and let ULP
   and/or application-layer timeout processing decide if and when to
   close the connection (and underlying connection latch).

(b) means potentially hanging forever, but that's generally true now
with existing ULPs.

The I-D says (b), with "SHOULD".

I'd be just as happy with (a), SHOULD, (b) MAY.  I would not be happy
with (a), MUST, nor with (b), MUST.

Comments?

Nico
--