[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Bug fixed! (RSVP/ns)
Hello,
I'm sorry for not having too much time anymore for giving any kind
of support for RSVP/ns. However, I do have a comment on that "bug"
and the proposed change:
> -(918) sender->get-addr());
> +(918) r->sender->get_addr());
Did you make sure that it is correct instead of just changing it
because it looked good and didn't cause any error anymore? I don't
know the code well enough anymore to really make any comment
about that without having a close look, so I am just asking.
> After such a correction, it should be OK. I think this bug is
> caused by the program itself, instead of OS. It has nothing
> to do with
> the version of ns.
Actually the reason why the bug didn't come up for me was most
probably the OS (or actually the compiler) after all, or else I
most certainly would have seen that problem myself at some point.
Different Unix flavors and compilers seem to have fairly different
opinions about when to produce a core dump.
> However, I am not sure whether there are other errors
> in RSVP/ns
> because I have not completely understood some parts of RSVP/ns source
> code.
I still have my doubts about running RSVP/ns in ns-2.1b5 anyway,
and while I could never make any guarantees about the correctness
of the code in 2.1b3, the guarantees when running it in 2.1b5 are
even lower.
> In addition, it seems Resv message can not automatially be sent
> by receiver as soon as it gets Path message. I feel it is not good.
Am I missing something? There are two problems with your statement
above:
1) You CAN send a Resv message automatically when receiving a Path
message. You simply have to redefine the Path-Upcall for that. I
am pretty sure it was done in one of the examples provided with the
RSVP/ns package.
2) Even if you would not be able to do it automatically, I wouldn't
see the huge problem. You make it sound as if that would be a bug,
but in fact there is nothing in the RSVP-related RFCs that says
that a reservation should be set up automatically upon reception
of a path message. The fact that you CAN do it in RSVP/ns is just
an additional feature.
Best Regards,
Marc
PS: To everyone who requested the RSVP/ns code from me: I will get
to it this weekend, I promise. ;)
--
Marc Greis [email protected]