Subject: Re: questions on draft-ietf-intserv-rsvp-use-00.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 96 15:46:49 PDT

*> From [email-masked] Wed Aug 14 15:37:15 1996
  *> To: [email-masked], [email-masked]
  *> Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
  *> Subject: questions on draft-ietf-intserv-rsvp-use-00.txt
  *> X-Sender-Data: Roch Guerin
  *>                IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
  *>                P.O. Box 704
  *>                Yorktown Heights, NY 10598
  *>                Tel: 914 784-7038, x-6318 (Fax); T/L 863
  *> Reply-To: [email-masked]
  *> Date: Wed, 14 Aug 1996 18:37:08 -0400
  *> From: Roch Guerin <[email-masked]>
  *> Content-Length: 2263
  *> X-Lines: 49
  *> 
  *> John and Bob, 
  *> 
  *> I agree with Lou.  Also, currently John's doc states (bottom of p. 6
  *> and top of p. 7):
  *> 
  *>    Upon arrival at a receiver, the complete absence of
  *>    an ADSPEC fragment for a specific service indicates to receivers that
  *>    the service should not be used.
  *> 
  *> Since all services now have ADSPECs, including CL, it seems to me
  *> that this makes it mandatory for ADSPEC to be supported.
  *> 

Roch,

Ooops.  There was never any question about RSVP support for ADSPEC being
mandatory [support is mandatory].

Bob Braden