Re: NOP-Out clarification

[julian_satran@il.ibm.com]

As far as I know there will be an "action items list" that David Black is
supposed to send out
and, as usual, the notes (a summary of who said what).

Regards,
Julo

Santosh Rao <santoshr@cup.hp.com> on 19/01/2001 01:04:05

Please respond to Santosh Rao <santoshr@cup.hp.com>

To:   Julian Satran/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
cc:
Subject:  Re: NOP-Out clarification




Julian,

I don't know if this is a question for yourself or David. (but I will ask
anyway.). Is somebody going to be sending out a write-up on the discussions
conducted and decisions reached at the ips WG meet at Orlando, for the
benefit of folks like myself who could'nt make it.

Regards,
Santosh

julian_satran@il.ibm.com wrote:

> JP,
>
> The consesus at the intermediate meeting in Orlando was to drop Data
> Numbering.
> If you have strong object here is your last chance to object.
>
> Also Data Numbering was meant only for incoming data and it is per
command
> ("less than a task" if you take in account linked commands).
>
> Regards,
> Julo
>
> Please respond to Raghavendra Rao <jp.raghavendra@sun.com>
>
> To:   ips@ece.cmu.edu
> cc:
> Subject:  NOP-Out clarification
>
> My reading of NOP-out as used for data-in acknowledgements is that
> it is for the entire task - Not per R2T since I don't see offset/length
> in the NOP-out header. Is my assumption correct ? It would be nice
> if the draft can be more explicit.
>
> Thanks.
>
> -JP

 - santoshr.vcf