Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!oberon!cit-vax!ucla-cs!zen!ucbvax!CCQ.BBN.COM!pogran From: pogran@CCQ.BBN.COM (Ken Pogran) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip Subject: Re: X.25 problems Message-ID: <8710161321.AA11112@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> Date: Fri, 16-Oct-87 08:36:45 EDT Article-I.D.: ucbvax.8710161321.AA11112 Posted: Fri Oct 16 08:36:45 1987 Date-Received: Sat, 17-Oct-87 20:38:00 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: The ARPA Internet Lines: 35 Dave, In your message Wednesday to Lars Poulsen of ACC you said, "I would assume the polite driver would keep an activity with entries for each active VC and clear the oldest/least-used to make room for the next one. I would assume this would also happen if an incoming call request appeared from the network and all VCs were committed. Further, I would assume both the PSN and ACC would do this kind of thing, no matter what the imeouts chosen." The PSN developers tell me that the PSN CAN'T initiate a clear of an active (and non-idle) VC just to make room for the next VC as that is a violation of the X.25 spec. The DTE can, of course, initiate a clear of VCs for any reason. One thing we CAN do in the PSN is limit, from its side, the number of active VCs with a host. For example, if the PSN is configured to not allow more than N VCs with a host because we know that's a limitation in the host, the PSN would decline an incoming call request for a host if it would be the N+1st active VC with that host. This might be desirable if the host's receiving an incoming call request from the PSN that put it over its limit would cause its software to hang or otherwise behave badly instead of cleanly rejecting the incoming call. Don't know if this pertains to any behavior we're currently seeing in the net, though. Ken P.S. The developers also tell me that having an idle timer "stretches" the spec. I am NOT going to split hairs and get into semantic discussions over when a VC is "active" and when it is "idle!"