Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 16:11:54 +0100
From: Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
To: Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@gmail.com>
Cc: linux1394-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Remaining problems in firewire-net
Message-ID: <20101116161154.655470f5@stein>
In-Reply-To: <1289878275.16486.57.camel@maxim-laptop>
References: <tkrat.036c5d10fb83f85d@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
	<1289795401.11881.62.camel@maxim-laptop>
	<20101115090103.0df0b5ef@stein>
	<1289878275.16486.57.camel@maxim-laptop>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1029
Lines: 27

On Nov 16 Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> The IP over 1394 tells that unicast can also use ISO transactions.
> However, it doesn't say how to negotiate the ISO channel number, thus a
> logical conclusion is that its not possible to use ISO transactions for
> unicast.
> Is that right?

To my understanding, any unicast transport method other than block write
to the unicast FIFO are outside the scope of RFC 2734.  At the end of
section 7:
"""
   Unicast IP datagrams whose quality of service is best-effort SHALL be
   contained within the data payload of 1394 block write transactions [...]
"""
"""
   Unicast IP datagrams that require quality of service other than
   best-effort are beyond the scope of this standard.
"""
-- 
Stefan Richter
-=====-==-=- =-== =----
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/