Forward compatibility to Amd1 server with pre-assigned URCB/BRCB
An Ed2 Client shall also write the BRCB.resvTms and URCB.resv when these are pre-assigned in an Ed2Amd1 server.
For an Ed2 server such write will result in a response failure!
To be forward compatible the Ed2 client has 2 options:
1) always write resvTms/resv and ignore the response-
2) determine the server is Ed2Amd1 and reserve or Ed1/Ed2 and don't reserve
Updated by Richard Schimmel 11 months ago
Discussed over e-mail with Bruce/Herb: UCAiug can't force Ed2 client to implement Amd1 behavior. We propose to add a PIXIT entry and add a conditional test case to make this behavior visible on the certificate. For sure Amd1 behavior shall not fail the Ed2 test.
Updated by Bruce Muschlitz 11 months ago
(new) PIXIT entry Rp25 only allows both or neither URCB and BRCB to support Ed2.1 SCL-reserved case. Should this be into separate responses for URCB and BRCB cases?
a) A Ed2.0 client might support only 1 of the 2 URCB/BRCB cases (and therefore PIXIT entry should be split)
b) It would be less confusing if we only pass devices which do both or neither (and therefore no change)
Updated by Richard Schimmel 10 months ago
- File Solution to redmine 3115 cRp16-cBr16_20211019.docx Solution to redmine 3115 cRp16-cBr16_20211019.docx added
- Status changed from In Progress to Resolved
- Final Decision set to Split cRp16/cBr16 in a) and b) part and added PIXIT entry
TPWG solution updated to make cRp16a and cRp16b conditions mutually exclusive