[Ns-developers] release update [feedback needed]

[Tommaso Pecorella]

Hi,

two bugs, one old and one new.

Bug#: 562 is still there (I marked it as reopened).


New "bug" (or it's a feature, depending on the fact that it's a  
documented behaviour).

With the new Tags, i.e., he ByteTags and PacketTags, an odd behaviour  
can be seen. BTW, I really like the differentiation between the two  
tag types.

ByteTags: all works as expected. Better, I haven't found any odd  
behaviour.

PacketTags: when you aggregate/deaggregate a bunch of packets, the  
respective PacketTags are lost. On the opposite ByteTags are preserved.
The aggregation/deaggregation happens for example using 802.11 AMSDU.  
I'm not totally keen about considering this the intended behaviour,  
but again it's a matter of knowledge.

Seriously, I'd consider this as a bug. I couldn't yet verify if the  
tags are lost during the aggregation or the deaggregation, but it's a  
matter of finding some time to hack a simulation code I have.

Anyway, this is the actual behaviour. Right now it's not affecting  
anything but the seldom used PacketTags. On the other hand it severely  
limits the usefulness of the PacketTag itself.

I'll send a full bug report as soon as I'll have some time to track  
down the exact point where the tags are wiped out, even tho it might  
be needed to fix both the Packet::AddAtEnd (used in the aggregation  
process) and the MsduAggregator::Deaggregate.

Cheers,

Tommaso Pecorella



On 09/giu/09, at 10:03, Mathieu Lacage wrote:

> hi,
>
> Current items still on the table for merging:
>
>  - the virtual net device: gustavo went through a couple of iterations
> with tom, I lost track of the status of this project. Gustavo, could  
> you
> merge in today ? If not, what is holding this ?
>
>  - craig's testing: we will get something for review this week
>
> Bugs which could be fixed for the release:
>  - 456: doxygen introspection output needs work
>  - 555, 585: dcf bugs (pending serious review)
>  - 563/565: stats patches (pending review by joe)
>  - 569: tap bridge and VMs
>  - 578: zipf variable
>  - 579, 559, 427, 426, 424: tcp bugs
>  - 539: documentation fixes
>  - other bugs I forgot ?
>
> The june 15th freeze I was planning for initially is looking
> increasingly unlikely since we still are waiting for the testing
> changes. At this point, there are 2 options:
>
> 1) wait for the testing changes, and delay the release for 2 weeks to
> shake all the loose ends in our code. This means a release by july  
> 1st.
>
> 2) freeze now, aim for a release on june 15th or 20th and push the
> testing changes for just after the release.
>
> If I put my release manager hat on, I would tend to do [2]: I feel  
> that
> it's getting a bit too late for the testing changes and I don't see  
> any
> strong do-or-die argument in favor of merging so late. Are there
> comments ? Preferences about one option or another ?
>
> Mathieu
>

--------------------------------------------------------------

The nice thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from.
And if you really don't like all the standards you just have to wait  
another year until the one arises you are looking for.
-- A. Tanenbaum, "Introduction to Computer Networks"

--------------------------------------------------------------

Tommaso Pecorella - Ph.D.

Assistant professor
Dpt. Elettronica e Telecomunicazioni
Università di Firenze

CNIT - Università di Firenze Unit

via di S. Marta 3
50139, Firenze
ITALY

email: tommaso.pecorella at unifi.it
        tommaso.pecorella at cnit.it

phone : +39-055-4796412
mobile: +39-320-4379803
fax   : +39-055-494569