Subject: RE: [Forces-protocol] HB msgs ?

From: "Khosravi, Hormuzd M" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 10:28:31 -0700

Robert,

You have articulated the tradeoff logic well below, Thanks for this.
Just one point, I don't believe HB is related with LFB in anyways, its
purely a protocol characteristic to determine association aliveness or
connectivity between the CEs, FEs.

regards
Hormuzd

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Haas [mailto:[email-masked]] 

All,
We should assess the tradeoff for HB (and potentially other 
protocol-specific messages) being treated as:

a) an Event (of a meta LFB representing the FE),
 or
b) as its own specific Message Type (i.e., in the Common Header).

To me, the most important is that:

a) has a cleaner unified design: protocol-specific messages such as HB 
are treated as LFB messages, but

b) has a simpler parsing when doing traffic analysis: protocol-specific 
messages are easier to spot in the flow of LFB messages: no need to look

into the body of the message to find out that it is a HB.

Anyone has other arguments in favor of one or the other ? Let's then 
judge which one is more suitable.

-Robert

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