From beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org Fri May 7 18:35:23 2004 Received: from qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (adsl-64-168-10-251.dsl.scrm01.pacbell.net [64.168.10.251]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA25803 for ; Fri, 7 May 2004 18:35:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i47MG92j022168; Fri, 7 May 2004 15:16:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from colo-dns-ext1.juniper.net (colo-dns-ext1.juniper.net [207.17.137.57]) by qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i47M9N2j022106 for ; Fri, 7 May 2004 15:09:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from merlot.juniper.net (merlot.juniper.net [172.17.27.10]) by colo-dns-ext1.juniper.net (8.11.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id i47M9Hl26267 for ; Fri, 7 May 2004 15:09:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from lzhang@juniper.net) Received: from juniper.net (lzhang-bsd.juniper.net [172.17.20.151]) by merlot.juniper.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id i47M9CJ84632 for ; Fri, 7 May 2004 15:09:12 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from lzhang@juniper.net) Message-ID: <409C0908.2050601@juniper.net> From: Lei Zhang User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:0.9.8) Gecko/20020206 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: beepwg@lists.beepcore.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [BEEPwg] pipelining within channel 0 Sender: beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org Errors-To: beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org X-BeenThere: beepwg@lists.beepcore.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Mailing list for the IETF's BEEP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri, 07 May 2004 15:09:12 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit So RFC 3080 says: A BEEP peer acting in the server role must process all "MSG" messages for a given channel in the same order as they are received. As a consequence, the BEEP peer must generate replies in the same order as the corresponding "MSG" messages are received on a given channel. For channel 0, which peer is considered "acting in the server role"? Cannot the modifier 'acting in the server role' be taken away? I'm wondering if the chan0 MSG messages need to be replied in the same order they are received. Specifically, if peer A receives then , but it takes longer to close channel 1 than it takes to close channel 2, cannot peer A reply to the 2nd close message first? Thanks, Lei _______________________________________________ BEEPwg mailing list BEEPwg@lists.beepcore.org http://lists.beepcore.org/mailman/listinfo/beepwg From beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org Tue May 11 18:49:46 2004 Received: from qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (adsl-64-168-10-251.dsl.scrm01.pacbell.net [64.168.10.251]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA03751 for ; Tue, 11 May 2004 18:49:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4BMR8b2011857; Tue, 11 May 2004 15:27:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Marshall-Roses-Computer.local (64-73-228-56.cust.telepacific.net [64.73.228.56]) by qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4BMM4b2011809 for ; Tue, 11 May 2004 15:22:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by Marshall-Roses-Computer.local (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF21C19C4E2; Tue, 11 May 2004 15:21:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <409C0908.2050601@juniper.net> References: <409C0908.2050601@juniper.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v613) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <9D4F2768-A399-11D8-BA73-000A95CA7FAE@dbc.mtview.ca.us> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: beepwg@lists.beepcore.org From: Marshall Rose Subject: Re: [BEEPwg] pipelining within channel 0 To: Lei Zhang X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.613) Sender: beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org Errors-To: beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org X-BeenThere: beepwg@lists.beepcore.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Mailing list for the IETF's BEEP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 15:21:57 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > So RFC 3080 says: > > A BEEP peer acting in the server role must process all "MSG" messages > for a given channel in the same order as they are received. As a > consequence, the BEEP peer must generate replies in the same order as > the corresponding "MSG" messages are received on a given channel. > > For channel 0, which peer is considered "acting in the server role"? > Cannot the modifier 'acting in the server role' be taken away? I'm > wondering if the chan0 MSG messages need to be replied in the same > order they are received. Specifically, if peer A receives number='1'> then , but it takes longer to close > channel 1 than it takes to close channel 2, cannot peer A reply to the > 2nd close message first? you raise an interesting point. keith and/or pete may have a different perspective on this. i would say that the peer acting the listening role would be considered as the peer acting in the server role for channel zero. (although i agree that the specification doesn't clearly spell this out.) a related ambiguity is how to handle a simultaneous close on channel zero! /mtr _______________________________________________ BEEPwg mailing list BEEPwg@lists.beepcore.org http://lists.beepcore.org/mailman/listinfo/beepwg From beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org Wed May 12 00:54:11 2004 Received: from qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (adsl-64-168-10-251.dsl.scrm01.pacbell.net [64.168.10.251]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA20372 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 00:54:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4C4b4b2015193; Tue, 11 May 2004 21:37:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wetware.com (wetware.wetware.com [199.108.16.1]) by qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4C4ZDb2015167 for ; Tue, 11 May 2004 21:35:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [208.177.152.17] (helo=[10.0.1.5]) by wetware.com with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNlSJ-0000Fn-8a; Tue, 11 May 2004 21:34:55 -0700 In-Reply-To: <9D4F2768-A399-11D8-BA73-000A95CA7FAE@dbc.mtview.ca.us> References: <409C0908.2050601@juniper.net> <9D4F2768-A399-11D8-BA73-000A95CA7FAE@dbc.mtview.ca.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v613) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Lei Zhang , beepwg@lists.beepcore.org From: james woodyatt Subject: Re: [BEEPwg] pipelining within channel 0 To: Marshall Rose X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.613) Sender: beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org Errors-To: beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org X-BeenThere: beepwg@lists.beepcore.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Mailing list for the IETF's BEEP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 21:34:53 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 11 May 2004, at 15:21, Marshall Rose wrote: > > a related ambiguity is how to handle a simultaneous close on channel > zero! Here's how that works in my implementation: if you have sent a and not yet received a reply/error, then you respond to a by sending an in response. If you receive an in response to a you've sent, and you've responded to a with an then you retry the if you're the peer in the initiator role. -- j h woodyatt _______________________________________________ BEEPwg mailing list BEEPwg@lists.beepcore.org http://lists.beepcore.org/mailman/listinfo/beepwg From beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org Mon May 24 16:14:03 2004 Received: from qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (adsl-64-168-10-251.dsl.scrm01.pacbell.net [64.168.10.251]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA25698 for ; Mon, 24 May 2004 16:14:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4OJwALQ021485; Mon, 24 May 2004 12:58:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.ncsa.uiuc.edu (mail.ncsa.uiuc.edu [141.142.2.28]) by qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4OJmELQ021397 for ; Mon, 24 May 2004 12:48:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Envelope-From: dxin@ncsa.uiuc.edu X-Envelope-To: Received: from osage.ncsa.uiuc.edu (osage.ncsa.uiuc.edu [141.142.2.56]) by mail.ncsa.uiuc.edu (8.11.7/8.11.7) with ESMTP id i4OJmCx30640 for ; Mon, 24 May 2004 14:48:12 -0500 Received: from localhost (dxin@localhost) by osage.ncsa.uiuc.edu (8.11.7/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i4OJmAZ28772 for ; Mon, 24 May 2004 14:48:12 -0500 From: Dong Xin To: beepwg@lists.beepcore.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-NCSA-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the help@ncsa.uiuc.edu for more information X-NCSA-MailScanner: Found to be clean Subject: [BEEPwg] Help on beepcore-java Sender: beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org Errors-To: beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org X-BeenThere: beepwg@lists.beepcore.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Mailing list for the IETF's BEEP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 14:48:10 -0500 (CDT) Hi, I am a new user of beepcore. I am wondering if anybody has some examples. I saw there was an example in the source code, but it seems too simple, I'd like to see more examples. Thanks a lot. Dong _______________________________________________ BEEPwg mailing list BEEPwg@lists.beepcore.org http://lists.beepcore.org/mailman/listinfo/beepwg From beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org Mon May 24 17:08:22 2004 Received: from qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (adsl-64-168-10-251.dsl.scrm01.pacbell.net [64.168.10.251]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA00571 for ; Mon, 24 May 2004 17:08:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4OKm6LQ021951; Mon, 24 May 2004 13:48:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from miz-mishtal.dbc.mtview.ca.us (miz-mishtal.dbc.mtview.ca.us [64.168.10.250]) by qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4OKdRLQ021874 for ; Mon, 24 May 2004 13:39:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by miz-mishtal.dbc.mtview.ca.us (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4OKWO9g008333; Mon, 24 May 2004 13:32:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v613) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <76845515-ADC1-11D8-B606-000A95CA7FAE@dbc.mtview.ca.us> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: beepwg@lists.beepcore.org From: Marshall Rose Subject: Re: [BEEPwg] Help on beepcore-java To: Dong Xin X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.613) Sender: beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org Errors-To: beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org X-BeenThere: beepwg@lists.beepcore.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Mailing list for the IETF's BEEP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 13:32:23 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit i suggest sending your question to http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/beepcore-java-users /mtr _______________________________________________ BEEPwg mailing list BEEPwg@lists.beepcore.org http://lists.beepcore.org/mailman/listinfo/beepwg From beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org Wed May 26 18:23:47 2004 Received: from qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (adsl-64-168-10-251.dsl.scrm01.pacbell.net [64.168.10.251]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA24869 for ; Wed, 26 May 2004 18:23:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4QM88LQ026913; Wed, 26 May 2004 15:08:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.ncsa.uiuc.edu (mail.ncsa.uiuc.edu [141.142.2.28]) by qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4QM0PLQ026835 for ; Wed, 26 May 2004 15:00:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Envelope-From: dxin@ncsa.uiuc.edu X-Envelope-To: Received: from osage.ncsa.uiuc.edu (osage.ncsa.uiuc.edu [141.142.2.56]) by mail.ncsa.uiuc.edu (8.11.7/8.11.7) with ESMTP id i4QM0Kx28166 for ; Wed, 26 May 2004 17:00:20 -0500 Received: from localhost (dxin@localhost) by osage.ncsa.uiuc.edu (8.11.7/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i4QM0JD13703 for ; Wed, 26 May 2004 17:00:19 -0500 From: Dong Xin To: beepwg@lists.beepcore.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-NCSA-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the help@ncsa.uiuc.edu for more information X-NCSA-MailScanner: Found to be clean Subject: [BEEPwg] TLS with mutual authentication Sender: beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org Errors-To: beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org X-BeenThere: beepwg@lists.beepcore.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Mailing list for the IETF's BEEP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 17:00:19 -0500 (CDT) Hi My question is how to start TLS between server and client with mutual authentication? How can I specify certificate for client and server side? Thanks, Dong _______________________________________________ BEEPwg mailing list BEEPwg@lists.beepcore.org http://lists.beepcore.org/mailman/listinfo/beepwg From beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org Wed May 26 18:58:06 2004 Received: from qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (adsl-64-168-10-251.dsl.scrm01.pacbell.net [64.168.10.251]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA26614 for ; Wed, 26 May 2004 18:58:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4QMc3LQ027186; Wed, 26 May 2004 15:38:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from colo-dns-ext2.juniper.net (colo-dns-ext2.juniper.net [207.17.137.64]) by qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4QMbXLQ027160 for ; Wed, 26 May 2004 15:37:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from merlot.juniper.net (merlot.juniper.net [172.17.27.10]) by colo-dns-ext2.juniper.net (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id i4QMbSBm063890; Wed, 26 May 2004 15:37:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from lzhang@juniper.net) Received: from juniper.net (lzhang-bsd.juniper.net [172.17.20.151]) by merlot.juniper.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id i4QMbSJ83061; Wed, 26 May 2004 15:37:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from lzhang@juniper.net) Message-ID: <40B51C28.70807@juniper.net> From: Lei Zhang User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:0.9.8) Gecko/20020206 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dong Xin CC: beepwg@lists.beepcore.org Subject: Re: [BEEPwg] TLS with mutual authentication References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org Errors-To: beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org X-BeenThere: beepwg@lists.beepcore.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Mailing list for the IETF's BEEP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 15:37:28 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dong Xin wrote: >Hi > > My question is how to start TLS between server and client with >mutual authentication? How can I specify certificate for client and >server side? > >Thanks, >Dong > I think the RFC's mentioning of using serverName to specify server side certificate is really not a good solution. This is what I plan to do for my BEEP implementation: - the server can take a command line option that points to a X.509 certificate - on the client side, in order to really verify the certificate, the server certificate must be copied to the client machine, then the client machine can take a command line option that points to this known server-side certificate - client starts TLS channel, SSL handshake starts, the server sends the certificate and the client verifies it - the client can take another command line option that points to a local certificate; if this is specified, then client certificate will be verified by server (the client-side certificate must be loaded on the server machine as pre-requisite) By doing this, it seems the only need for further authentication using SASL would be access-control. Sane? Lei _______________________________________________ BEEPwg mailing list BEEPwg@lists.beepcore.org http://lists.beepcore.org/mailman/listinfo/beepwg From beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org Thu May 27 12:06:08 2004 Received: from qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (adsl-64-168-10-251.dsl.scrm01.pacbell.net [64.168.10.251]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA05009 for ; Thu, 27 May 2004 12:06:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4RFm7LQ011316; Thu, 27 May 2004 08:48:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.ncsa.uiuc.edu (mail.ncsa.uiuc.edu [141.142.2.28]) by qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4RFj3LQ011285 for ; Thu, 27 May 2004 08:45:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Envelope-From: dxin@ncsa.uiuc.edu Received: from osage.ncsa.uiuc.edu (osage.ncsa.uiuc.edu [141.142.2.56]) by mail.ncsa.uiuc.edu (8.11.7/8.11.7) with ESMTP id i4RFigx28150; Thu, 27 May 2004 10:44:42 -0500 Received: from localhost (dxin@localhost) by osage.ncsa.uiuc.edu (8.11.7/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i4RFieD15961; Thu, 27 May 2004 10:44:40 -0500 From: Dong Xin To: Lei Zhang cc: beepwg@lists.beepcore.org Subject: Re: [BEEPwg] TLS with mutual authentication In-Reply-To: <40B51C28.70807@juniper.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-NCSA-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the help@ncsa.uiuc.edu for more information X-NCSA-MailScanner: Found to be clean Sender: beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org Errors-To: beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org X-BeenThere: beepwg@lists.beepcore.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Mailing list for the IETF's BEEP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 10:44:40 -0500 (CDT) Thanks a lot, Lei. However, I am a new user of beepcore. It will be great if you can explain more. I think the RFC's mentioning of using serverName to specify server side > certificate is really not a good solution. This is what I plan to do > for my BEEP implementation: > > - the server can take a command line option that points to a X.509 > certificate What is the "command line option", Is this command line option specified in config files? what's the format of this specification? > - on the client side, in order to really verify the certificate, the > server certificate must be copied to the client machine, then the client > machine can take a command line option that points to this known > server-side certificate > - client starts TLS channel, SSL handshake starts, the server sends the > certificate and the client verifies it why does the server need to send the certificate? Is a message signed by a private key not enough? > - the client can take another command line option that points to a > local certificate; if this is specified, then client certificate will be > verified by server (the client-side certificate must be loaded on the > server machine as pre-requisite) > > By doing this, it seems the only need for further authentication using > SASL would be access-control. > > Sane? > Lei > I do not know whether the mutual authentication is already supported by beepcore.tls or we have to implemented it in our application. Thanks.. Dong _______________________________________________ BEEPwg mailing list BEEPwg@lists.beepcore.org http://lists.beepcore.org/mailman/listinfo/beepwg From beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org Sun May 30 19:25:45 2004 Received: from qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (adsl-64-168-10-251.dsl.scrm01.pacbell.net [64.168.10.251]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA01049 for ; Sun, 30 May 2004 19:25:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4UNF8A7015348; Sun, 30 May 2004 16:15:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kazeon.com (mail.kazeon.com [209.172.74.40]) by qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4UN5bA7015270 for ; Sun, 30 May 2004 16:05:37 -0700 (PDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.6944.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-ID: <4E022DDAB8F45741914ACD6EDFE2309B18D3C2@BIGFOOT.kazeon.local> Thread-Topic: How many ways express session closure? Thread-Index: AcRGmppUWUtasibwQKOjRhoDC+kgbQ== From: "Michael MacFaden" To: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us id i4UN5bA7015270 Subject: [BEEPwg] How many ways express session closure? Sender: beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org Errors-To: beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org X-BeenThere: beepwg@lists.beepcore.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Mailing list for the IETF's BEEP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 30 May 2004 16:05:30 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi, RFC 3080 section 2.4 page 26 example does not include the number attribute. Yet the text indicates otherwise: When a BEEP peer wants to release the BEEP session, it sends a "close" element with a zero-valued "number" attribute on channel zero. The other BEEP peer indicates its willingness by sending an "ok" element in a positive reply, e.g., C: MSG 0 1 . 52 60 C: Content-Type: application/beep+xml C: C: C: END So what should it be? I looked at two C source implementations that expect the number attribute. Sorry if this is a duplicate but I didn't see a prior discussion in this list. Thanks, Mike MacFaden Kazeon Systems, Inc _______________________________________________ BEEPwg mailing list BEEPwg@lists.beepcore.org http://lists.beepcore.org/mailman/listinfo/beepwg From beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org Sun May 30 22:00:44 2004 Received: from qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (adsl-64-168-10-251.dsl.scrm01.pacbell.net [64.168.10.251]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA06678 for ; Sun, 30 May 2004 22:00:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4V1Z2A7016827; Sun, 30 May 2004 18:35:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from miz-mishtal.dbc.mtview.ca.us (miz-mishtal.dbc.mtview.ca.us [64.168.10.250]) by qawoor.dbc.mtview.ca.us (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4V1UCA7016781 for ; Sun, 30 May 2004 18:30:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by miz-mishtal.dbc.mtview.ca.us (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4V1RnGW018199; Sun, 30 May 2004 18:27:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4E022DDAB8F45741914ACD6EDFE2309B18D3C2@BIGFOOT.kazeon.local> References: <4E022DDAB8F45741914ACD6EDFE2309B18D3C2@BIGFOOT.kazeon.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v618) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: From: Marshall Rose Subject: Re: [BEEPwg] How many ways express session closure? To: "Michael MacFaden" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.618) Sender: beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org Errors-To: beepwg-admin@lists.beepcore.org X-BeenThere: beepwg@lists.beepcore.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Mailing list for the IETF's BEEP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 30 May 2004 18:27:49 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On May 30, 2004, at 16:05, Michael MacFaden wrote: > RFC 3080 section 2.4 page 26 example does not include the number > attribute. > Yet the text indicates otherwise: looking at the DTD, it indicates that the default for the channel attribute is zero. /mtr _______________________________________________ BEEPwg mailing list BEEPwg@lists.beepcore.org http://lists.beepcore.org/mailman/listinfo/beepwg