[BXXPwg] Message Number Implementation issue

Marshall Rose mrose+mtr.netnews@dbc.mtview.ca.us
Fri, 3 Nov 2000 22:34:11 -0800


hi. in the current beep spec, message numbers are unique per direction on a
given channel. in the old bxxp spec, serial numbers were unique per
direction on a given session.

one of the reasons for this change was the concern you cite regarding having
to keep a global list of sequence numbers. the unconvincing response was
that implementors could use a scheme along the lines of the one you mention.
(the one i had in mind involved some bit shifting, but no division).
however, the issue is now moot!

/mtr

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gabe Wachob" <gwachob@wachob.com>
To: <bxxpwg@invisible.net>
Sent: Friday, November 03, 2000 20:45
Subject: [BXXPwg] Message Number Implementation issue


> Hi-
> Trudging through implementing PyBXXP, I've come across a little
> optimization/simplification for generating message numbers that I'd like
to
> run by the folks.
>
> First of all, am I correct in the assumption that message numbers
> must be unique across all channels now? I'm assuming the answer is yes (I
> think this was discussed earlier). So, the question I have is whether
> anyone sees a problems with assiging a subset of the 2147483647 possible
> message numbers to each of the mandatory 257 channels? That is, can I
> simply make message number spaces of size 2147483647/257 for each channel
I
> am working in? That way, I don't have to keep a global list of unresponded
> msg's (it makes a difference in my architecture). It would save me some
> work..
>
> Am I correct in making the assumption that I only have to support
> 257 channels? Will this affect interoperability?
>
> TIA
>
> -Gabe
>
> _______________________________________________
> BXXPwg mailing list
> BXXPwg@lists.invisible.net
> http://lists.invisible.net/mailman/listinfo/bxxpwg
>