[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Issue 5.1) SSH End of message directive

To: Ted Goddard <ted.goddard@windriver.com>
Subject: Re: Issue 5.1) SSH End of message directive
From: Phil Shafer <phil@juniper.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 16:38:52 -0500
Cc: netconf@ops.ietf.org, Mark Stahl <mark.stahl@utstar.com>, "David T. Perkins" <dperkins@dsperkins.com>, Juergen Schoenwaelder <schoenw@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>, Graham Klyne <GK-lists@ninebynine.org>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 16 Dec 2003 14:13:02 MST." <A1D1F7A4-300C-11D8-9C0E-003065C0229A@windriver.com>

Ted Goddard writes:
>Should the connection be closed upon any XML well-formedness errors?

Yes, since with out a framing protocol, there is no way to reliably
recover the connection.  The two peers cannot agree on what the
state of the connection is, which means that one side could hang
waiting on the other side to send data that will never come.  The
possibility of hanging and the probability of dropping data go
strongly against the sort of exactness one wants in an API.

Thanks,
 Phil

--
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/>

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Issue 5.1) SSH End of message directive
  - From: Rob Enns <rpe@juniper.net>

References:
- Re: Issue 5.1) SSH End of message directive
  - From: Ted Goddard <ted.goddard@windriver.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Issue 5.1) SSH End of message directive
Next by Date: Re: Issue 5.1) SSH End of message directive
Previous by thread: Re: Issue 5.1) SSH End of message directive
Next by thread: Re: Issue 5.1) SSH End of message directive
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread