RE: [Bluez-devel] Qualification Testing

Max,

Regarding the L2CAP parameter negotiation.  Not sure if you saw this (see
below).

This is the one remaining problem impeding qualification. Except, of course=
,
for the possibility of more failures in the next round of testing.

What are your thoughts on it?

Thanks,

-Daryl.

-----Original Message-----
From: bluez-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net=20
[mailto:bluez-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net] On Behalf Of=20
Daryl Van Vorst
Sent: May 13, 2003 11:36 AM
To: 'Max Krasnyansky'; 'Marcel Holtmann'
Cc: 'BlueZ Mailing List'
Subject: RE: [Bluez-devel] Qualification Testing
=20
=20
Max,
=20

quoted

quoted

Max - You mentioned that the spec says that what the stack

does with a

quoted

config reject can be implementation specific. I just had a

look at the

quoted

spec and couldn't find it. Could you tell me where to look

in the spec?
=20
section 6.1
page 297
=20
"Since all L2CAP implementations are capable to support a
minimum L2CAP packet size, see Section 4 on page 280, MTU is=20
not really a negotiated value but rather an informational=20
parameter to the remote device that the local device can=20
accommodate in this channel an MTU larger than the minimum=20
required. In the unlikely case that the remote device is only=20
willing to send L2CAP packets in this channel that are larger=20
than the MTU announced by the local device, then this=20
Configuration Request will receive a negative response in=20
which the remote device will include the value of MTU that is=20
indented to transmit. In this case, it is implementation=20
specific on whether the local device will continue the=20
configuration process or even maintain this channel."

=20
What about flowspec and flush timeout?
=20
In section 6.4.2 FlushTO is listed as one of the items in the=20
response path (along with MTU and InFlow). But in section 7.5=20
only MTU and InFlow are listed.
=20
I sent the above quote to Cetecom last week. They responded=20
saying that MTU isn't the only negotiated parameter.
=20
-Daryl.
=20
=20
=20
-------------------------------------------------------
Enterprise Linux Forum Conference & Expo, June 4-6, 2003,=20
Santa Clara The only event dedicated to issues related to=20
Linux enterprise solutions www.enterpriselinuxforum.com
=20
_______________________________________________
Bluez-devel mailing list
Bluez-devel@lists.sourceforge.net=20
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/b> luez-devel
=20

-------------------------------------------------------
Enterprise Linux Forum Conference & Expo, June 4-6, 2003, Santa Clara
The only event dedicated to issues related to Linux enterprise solutions
www.enterpriselinuxforum.com

_______________________________________________
Bluez-devel mailing list
Bluez-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bluez-devel