Re: little problem with <close-session>

[Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>]

Randy Presuhn wrote:
> That's not the case we were worried about.
> The scenario is where a manager sends one
> or more commands, and then closes the connection
> without waiting for the response(s).  The agent will
> be able to read the (buffered) commands, but will
> get an error when it tries to send the responses on
> the closed connection.  Regardless of whether we think
> this is a smart thing to do, we need to define what happens.

ahh... okay, I think we have been miscommunicating.  I don't propose 
that the BEEP application mapping close the transport connection until 
all responses are received.  As it receives those responses it can ACK 
them at the TCP level.

N.B. in BEEP the initiator always initiates the transport close.  This 
may be a problem, given Margaret's concerns, but <close-session> doesn't 
address that part at all.

Eliot

--
to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>