[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: commit bit processing
- To: "Derrell D. Piper" <ddp@network-alchemy.com>
- Subject: Re: commit bit processing
- From: "S. B. Kulkarni" <srinu@trinc.com>
- Date: Thu, 03 Sep 1998 18:06:35 +0500
- Cc: ipsec@tis.com
- In-Reply-To: <199808060235.TAA23868@gallium.network-alchemy.com>
- References: <Your message of "Wed, 05 Aug 1998 20:23:27 EDT." <35C8F77E.D2AB6301@ire-ma.com>
- Sender: owner-ipsec@ex.tis.com
Hi,
I want to know what finally decided, on how to process commit bit
At 07:35 PM 8/5/98 -0700, Derrell D. Piper wrote:
>I agree that it's more logical under the QM exchange (since it's probably
a QM
>state in your state machine and it uses the QM message ID). My
implementation
>currently sends it under as an Informational, but I'm happy to change.
>
>Derrell
Thank U
- Srinu