RE: iFCP:Timeout and Encapsulation (was FC-BB exists, why invent something new?)

[Charles Monia <cmonia@NishanSystems.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Douglas Otis [mailto:dotis@sanlight.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2001 10:24 AM
> To: Charles Monia; Y P Cheng; IPS Reflector
> Subject: RE: iFCP: FC-BB exists, why invent something new?
> 
> 
> Charles,
> 
> Assurances are made with the fabric timeout but you do not offer a
> time-stamp to keep this promise.  TCP will try well beyond a FC fabric
> timeout.  A cable swap as example could exceed nominal delays.
> 

We are looking at a number of ways to measure whether or not the underlying
network is performing within the parameters of such a performance guarantee.
We're also considering a capability that allows the system user to set the
required timeouts and establish alarm thresholds and contingency policies.

> Would you see it possible to make a separate proposal to cover just
> encapsulation and another proposal to include iFCP specific 
> link services?
> For those wishing just a tunnel, the encapsulation proposal, 
> with a small
> (perhaps optional) iFCP specific field, could serve both purposes.
> 

We would need to carefully consider the consequences of such a proposal.
I'd be especially concerned about consequences down the road that might
impact the ability to make changes to both protocols over time.  Although I
can't speak for them of course, I suspect the tunneling folks may have a
similar view.

<Material deleted>

Charles