[Sis-uce] Thoughts?

[Krupiarz, Christopher]

The original question for Scott was whether it would be worth applying the
Check Timer to the acknowledged procedures.  If it was, it would seem
worthwhile to modify the concept at this point to include this as opposed to
revisiting it later.  However, after this discussion, it would appear to not
be a concern.

Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: Massimilano.Ciccone@esa.int [mailto:Massimilano.Ciccone@esa.int]
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2003 11:29 AM
To: sis-uce@mailman.ccsds.org
Subject: RE: [Sis-uce] Thoughts?



The method proposed by Chris can be translated in eliminating sub-section
(a)
in paragrhaph 4.1.6.4.5 of CFDP Blue Book. I see it as an advantage only in
case PDUs can be delivered order (Data after EOF PDU), but I don't think it
is worth it to undergo the change process for this particular case.
But now a question sprang my mind...
How is this NAK (acknowledged only) discussion related to the Unacknowledge
procedures of CFDP ?

Max

SW Engineer
Data Handling Section
**************************************
VITROCISET - 2200 AG Noordwijk The Netherlands
ESTEC - ESA (TOS- ESD)
e-mail: Massimiliano.Ciccone@ESA.int  \|/
Ph: +31-71-5655310                    @ @
__________________________________o00-(_)-00o___



_______________________________________________
Sis-uce mailing list
Sis-uce@mailman.ccsds.org
http://mailman.ccsds.org/mailman/listinfo/sis-uce