Index: [Article Count Order] [Thread]

Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 11:39:43 +0900
From: <Hideshi.Enokihara@jp.yokogawa.com>
Subject: [dhcptest:00213] Re: DHCPv6 self-test RAND of .1 fails
To: <tammy_leino@mentor.com>
Cc: <dhcptest@tahi.org>
Message-Id: <0260031F55435342859BFB2CCA6773D81B898C60@EXCHANGE03.jp.ykgw.net>
In-Reply-To: <7ECEF9368E169544B43882BC98EB5D92032DAA08@SVR-ALH-EXC-02.mgc.mentorg.com>
X-Mail-Count: 00213

Hi Tammy, Thank you for your report.I would like to confirm your result which one is fail case.Coulde you send the logs to here or  contact@tahi.org, please? Best regards,Hideshi________________________________	From: Leino, Tammy [mailto:tammy_leino@mentor.com] 	Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 6:27 AM	To: dhcptest@tahi.org	Subject: [dhcptest:00211] Re: DHCPv6 self-test RAND of .1 fails			I apologize for the multiple emails, but I wanted to mentionthat the tests do not fail when RAND is -.1, which leads me to believethere is an anomaly in the TAHI test suite when RAND is .1.	Best Regards,	Tammy Leino 		 -----Original Message----- 		From:   Leino, Tammy  		Sent:   Tuesday, September 18, 2007 5:19 PM 		To:     'dhcptest@tahi.org' 		Subject:        DHCPv6 self-test RAND of .1 fails 		Hello All, 		Whenever my node generates a RAND value of .1, the TAHItest suite fails for all max retransmission time tests.  It seems theTAHI test suite is interpretting the definition of RAND in RFC 3315 as-.1 to .1 non-inclusive.		Here is the situation for RFC 3315 test #37 when RAND ischosen as .1 in retransmissions: 		First retransmission 		RT = IRT + (RAND * IRT) 		RT = 1 + (.1 * 1) 		RT = 1.1 		Second retransmission 		RT = (2 * RTprev) + (RAND * RTprev) 		RT = (2 * 1.1) + (.1 * 1.1) 		RT = 2.31 		Third retransmission 		RT = (2 * RTprev) + (RAND * RTprev) 		RT = (2 * 2.31) + (.1 * 2.31) 		RT = 4.851 		The test fails here due to "Actual RT is bigger than theexpected maximum value".  I am not sure what the expected maximum valueis.		First, can someone comment on whether the TAHI testsuite interprets the RAND values defined in RFC 3315 as inclusive ornon-inclusive?		Second, if the values are supposed to be inclusive, cansomeone verify that this is a problem with the TAHI test suite? 		Best Regards, 		Tammy Leino 
	

213_2.html (attatchment)(tag is disabled)