no hat
At 11:01 AM +0300 9/9/10, Tero Kivinen wrote:
Scott C Moonen writes:
I was thinking about the original initiator, not the exchange
initiator.
Ok, but this then imposes an awkward new requirement to remember the
original original initiator, as it were. Today the initiator of the
On Sep 8, 2010, at 1:50 PM, Tero Kivinen wrote:
Raj Singh writes:
It's actually worse than that. If message #4 was missed, and 5-8 were
received, then messages 5-8 are stored, but not processed. This has to be
so, because suppose message 7 deletes the SA that was created in message 4,
you
