From: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>
To: BlueZ Mailing List <bluez-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bluez-devel] L2CAP retransmission, flow control
Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2005 11:18:26 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1107944306.13863.15.camel@pegasus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1107940961.9489.32.camel@mammoth.research.nokia.com>
Hi Imre,
> > Feel free to start. I am happy to get L2CAP 1.2 support included. The
>
> Ok, we'll have already some basic stuff to support the new config
> options, I'll start then to implement the rest. L2CAP QoS could also be
> done at some point, for the moment I don't plan to add support to
> anything but 'best effort'.
don't worry too much about QoS at the moment.
> > L2CAP options now contain a mode value and this is exactly for this
> > purpose. Let the rest of the RFC config values be the defaults from the
> > specification by now. Another way to activate RFC would be to use the
> > SOCK_STREAM socket type.
> >
>
> Yes, I agree. Is it ok then to do the following?
>
> For SOCK_STREAM try to negotiate RFC, if peer doesn't accept use basic
> mode.
If SOCK_STREAM is requested and RFC negotiation fails, then also the
connection must fail. For SOCK_STREAM you need flow control.
> For SOCK_DGRAM, SOCK_RAW try to negotiate FC, if peer doesn't accept
> use basic mode.
For SOCK_DGRAM and SOCK_RAW we don't do anything. The SOCK_DGRAM is for
connection-less channels and SOCK_RAW gives access to the signal channel
itself.
If you use SOCK_SEQPACKET (current type) and mode > 0 then negotiate RFC
and if success then use it, otherwise fail.
> Other issues I was thinking about:
>
> The 1.2 spec says it's possible for L2CAP to send incorrect packets
> (with missing fragments) to upper layers with indication of the
> incorrect parts of the given packet. The only possiblity I found so far,
> is to signal that L2CAP reliability can't be guaranteed any more and
> drop the packet.
> Is there a way or is there a case at all where we should support
> applications that need such incorrect packets?
I think it is bad idea to support this and we don't really need it. This
interaction between different layers is useless from my point.
Regards
Marcel
-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
_______________________________________________
Bluez-devel mailing list
Bluez-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bluez-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-02-09 10:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-02-09 7:40 [Bluez-devel] L2CAP retransmission, flow control Imre Deak
2005-02-09 8:48 ` Marcel Holtmann
2005-02-09 9:22 ` Imre Deak
2005-02-09 10:18 ` Marcel Holtmann [this message]
2005-02-09 13:24 ` Imre Deak
2005-02-09 14:06 ` Marcel Holtmann
2005-02-09 17:04 ` Imre Deak
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1107944306.13863.15.camel@pegasus \
--to=marcel@holtmann.org \
--cc=bluez-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox