Imported from previous forum
[ original email was from Valentin Melamed - valo@easetech.com ]
The spec. says (pg.8): “Both sides should be agree upon a reset time. One side will initiate the process by sending a TestRequest and wait…” etc. Wouldn’t it be better if the spec. explicitly defines which side intiates the resetting sequence? Seems to me that the most logical site is the Initiator as it is defined on the previous page. Probably it is just the language in this particular sentence that confuses me because further down the same paragraph the terms initiator and acceptor are used.
Val Melamed
Ease Technologies, Inc.
[ original email was from Nikhil Bose - assistsoft@yahoo.com ]
Yes, that was my initial reaction too. But in the process of implementing it, I realized that the session initiator need not be the same party that initiates the logon reset. The logon reset, implementation-ally, is very similar to Logout, which again can be initiated by the acceptor in the session open scenario.
I do agree with you that the terms are sometimes confusing because the exact same terms are sometimes in completely different contexts.
Nikhil
> The spec. says (pg.8): “Both sides should be agree upon a reset time. One side will initiate the process by sending a TestRequest and wait…” etc. Wouldn’t it be better if the spec. explicitly defines which side intiates the resetting sequence? Seems to me that the most logical site is the Initiator as it is defined on the previous page. Probably it is just the language in this particular sentence that confuses me because further down the same paragraph the terms initiator and acceptor are used.
>
> Val Melamed
> Ease Technologies, Inc.
>