Subject: RE: [Forces-protocol] topic 4c: Common Header

From: "Khosravi, Hormuzd M" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 19:59:22 -0700

Jamal,

-----Original Message-----
From: Jamal Hadi Salim [mailto:[email-masked]] 

> [HK] I agree. The Transaction ID or Sequence No. should be the same in
> both Request and Response msgs e.g. Config/Config Resp to denote that
> they are part of the same transaction. That was the reason for having
a
> Sequence no to begin with.

If you call that 32 bit value a transaction # it may be a little
misleading; example a transaction may take several messages not just one
(Consider a two phase commit transaction where you send several messages
followed by a commit to complete the transaction). 
I think we should define it as a message sequence. 

[HK] Sure, I thought we already decided to call it Sequence no. Not sure
why Weiming used a different name ? BTW, do you agree with having the
same Sequence no in Req/Resp to match them ? I think you do, but just
wanted to confirm.

Next big question (I asked this earlier) how many PL level messages can
we have in flight? If more than one, do we need a windowing syntax in
the common header?

[HK] We can have more than one PL msg in flight, but I don't think we
need any windowing syntax in the common header. This will be provided by
the TML layer if needed. We will just use the Sequence no to match the
request/response msgs.

Thanks
Hormuzd

_______________________________________________
Forces-protocol mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/forces-protocol

---

From: Jamal Hadi Salim <[email-masked]>
Date: 04 May 2004 23:11:44 -0400

> same Sequence no in Req/Resp to match them ? I think you do, but just

Yes i do. 

> the TML layer if needed. We will just use the Sequence no to match the

I thinks its harder than that. 
Pipeling is known to improve throughput; basically for a given b/width
and RTT, you should be able to send in the range of BW*RTT bytes without
getting an ACK that the first message you sent. Windowing just keeps
track of how many such messages you have delivered to the network.
Imagine that given a 10Gige pipe, you can only using 100Mbps. 
Now i agree that adding windowing complicates things, but theres no way
you can pass the pipelining responsibility to the TML. The TML will send
as much data as you give it.
Batching may be sufficient - dont know.

cheers,
jamal