May 9, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Bob Bruninga <bruninga@...> wrote:
>> It would be nice to have taken a bit of time to ensure
>> that the BASELINE is currently correct rather than firing
>> off something incomplete to the manufacturers.
> Relax. How can we assure it is correct without involving them in
> assessment? Afterall, until Lynn came along, they were the
ONLY players in
> the game!
Nailing an accurate definition down would be a first step, and then
assess the implementation.
> I have many DOZENS of emails over several years with them clarifying these
> details in the FREQ SPEC. The SPEC evolved along with our mutual
> understanding. And I guess that contributed somewhat to its poor
> organization. Which I am trying to fix now.
I ended up working until midnight last night, so didn't get any time
to work on looking into your changes, nor towards creating a test
packet array to be used to identify the various implementations.