Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!drutx!mtuxo!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!akgua!gatech!seismo!mcvax!ukc!kcl-cs!glasgow!taylor
From: taylor@glasgow.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.lan
Subject: Re: Token rings, error reporting in
Message-ID: <341@glasgow.glasgow.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 4-Feb-86 15:05:17 EST
Article-I.D.: glasgow.341
Posted: Tue Feb  4 15:05:17 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 7-Feb-86 21:35:52 EST
References: <952@wdl1.UUCP>
Reply-To: taylor@glasgow.UUCP (Jem Taylor)
Distribution: net
Organization: Comp Sci Dept, Glasgow Univ, Scotland
Lines: 15

In article <952@wdl1.UUCP> jbn@wdl1.UUCP writes:
>     Which token rings actually provide indication of non-delivery to the 
>sender?  I've been told that the Cambridge Ring does and Proteon does not.

Actually, Cambridge Ring is a *slot* ring. However, in a slot ring, if you
see the mini-packet you sent not marked as recieved ( in fact there are 4
different statuses/stati it could have - accepted, rejected, no-one there
and another ... ), that is, unmodified except for the 'monitor-passed' flag,
you know your addressee is not on the ring.
 There's no problem about loss of token, because there's no token ...

-Jem-
-- 
JANET: taylor%glasgow.uucp@uk.ac.ed.cstvax          -o        Jemima
UUCP:  { uk }!cstvax!glasgow.uucp!taylor             (==).     Puddleduck