RE: MSRP: Are REPORTs per-chunk or per-message? (was Re: [Simple]Review of draft-ietf-simple-message-sessions-08 - Byte Ranges inREPORTs)

[hisham.khartabil at nokia.com]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Ben Campbell [mailto:ben at nostrum.com]
> Sent: 13.October.2004 05:51
> To: Cullen Jennings
> Cc: Paul H Kyzivat; Khartabil Hisham (Nokia-TP-MSW/Helsinki);
> rjsparks at nostrum.com; simple at ietf.org
> Subject: Re: MSRP: Are REPORTs per-chunk or per-message? (was Re:
> [Simple]Review of draft-ietf-simple-message-sessions-08 - Byte Ranges
> inREPORTs)
> 
> 
> So, a concrete proposal:
> 
> Relays that send a failure report because they are unable to 
> forward a 
> chunk to the next hop due to a transport error, or because 
> they receive 
> a failure response from the next hop for that chunk, SHOULD copy the 
> byte-range header value from the chunk to the failure report.
> 
> Endpoints sending a success or failure report SHOULD NOT include a 
> byte-range header.
> 
> Endpoints that receive a report containing a byte-range header MUST 
> assume the report only covers the bytes listed. If no 
> byte-range header 
> is present, or if the range is ambiguous , the endpoint MUST 
> assume the 
> report covers the entire message. How an endpoint uses this 
> information 
> is a matter of local policy.
> 

Sounds good to me.

/Hisham

_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
Simple at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple