<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>bacnet-mstpwg at Yahoo! Groups</title>
    <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/</link>
    <description>bacnet-mstpwg</description>

    <item>
      <title>New file uploaded to bacnet-mstpwg </title>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2013 13:25:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/150</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/150</guid>
      <description>Hello, This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the bacnet-mstpwg group. File        :</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: New file uploaded to bacnet-mstpwg</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Nov 2012 20:10:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>kerlyn2001</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/149</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/149</guid>
      <description>I have uploaded another release candidate for PPR1 of the MS/TP Large Frames proposal.  I was asked at the last SSPC to look into how to support other network</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>New file uploaded to bacnet-mstpwg </title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Nov 2012 19:46:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/148</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/148</guid>
      <description>Hello, This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the bacnet-mstpwg group. File        :</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Atlanta</title>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2012 15:37:44 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Carl Neilson</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/147</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/147</guid>
      <description>MSTP-WG The working group will convene in Atlanta with a stand in convener (thank you Kerry). Regards, Carl From: bacnet-mstpwg@yahoogroups.com</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Atlanta</title>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Oct 2012 19:09:03 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Kerry Lynn</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/146</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/146</guid>
      <description>Hi David, I wonder if you have ~15 min to chat by phone to discuss how to advance the large frames proposal?  I could put recent developments into an email,</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Atlanta</title>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Oct 2012 18:03:28 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>David Fisher</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/145</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/145</guid>
      <description>MSTP-WG Regrettably, I am unable to attend the interim working group meetings in Atlanta. As a result we will not be convening the MSTP-WG until the Winter</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Should a node be allowed to do more than one token retry?</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2012 13:38:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Hartman, John</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/144</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/144</guid>
      <description>I don&#39;t see how that differs much from just doing another token retry.  Clause 9 specifies the same timeout (Tusage_delay, 15 msec) for a node to begin using</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Should a node be allowed to do more than one token retry?</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Oct 2012 17:35:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>kerlyn2001</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/143</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/143</guid>
      <description>Rather than increasing the number of token retries, would it make sense (in the case of a lost token) for ThisStation to begin the PFM cycle at NS rather than </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Confusing text in 135-2010, 9.5.6.5</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Sep 2012 20:42:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Hartman, John</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/142</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/142</guid>
      <description>In 135-2010 SoleMasterRestartMaintenancePFM, &quot;set RetryCount and TokenCount to zero; set TokenCount to one&quot; seems clearly to be an error, since it gives two</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Confusing text in 135-2010, 9.5.6.5</title>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Sep 2012 17:54:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>kerlyn2001</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/141</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/141</guid>
      <description>In 135-2010, the SoleMasterRestartMaintenancePFM transition from DONE_WITH_TOKEN (sub-clause 9.5.6.5) currently reads: &quot;... set RetryCount and TokenCount to</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Should a node be allowed to do more than one token retry?</title>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2012 17:41:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Hartman, John</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/140</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/140</guid>
      <description>Immediately after hitting &quot;Send&quot;, it occurred to me that use-token-on-retry only during the ZeroConfig startup as Cliff suggests DOES have the advantage over</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Should a node be allowed to do more than one token retry?</title>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2012 17:24:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Hartman, John</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/139</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/139</guid>
      <description>I don&#39;t think waiting for token retry would make ZeroConfig any &quot;safer&quot;:  if there is a device with a fixed MAC at the chosen address, that device should have</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Should a node be allowed to do more than one token retry?</title>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2012 12:55:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Clifford.H.Copass@...</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/138</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/138</guid>
      <description>I agree with the &quot;sluggish&quot; comment and actually believe that is an understatement. Increasing susceptibility to dropping tokens is also true. To even think</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Should a node be allowed to do more than one token retry?</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Jul 2012 16:02:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Steve Karg</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/137</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/137</guid>
      <description>Hi MS/TP working group! Since we are discussing Token retries... I received some comments a week ago from an engineer (Bill) at Siemens (via Bernhard) on the</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Should a node be allowed to do more than one token retry?</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2012 14:44:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Hartman, John</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/136</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bacnet-mstpwg/message/136</guid>
      <description>Thanks for all the responses. I think I am spending too much time trying to figure out how to operate on links with lame devices.  I started to write out the</description>
    </item>

  </channel>
</rss>
<!-- rss2.grp.bf1.yahoo.com uncompressed Wed May 22 21:33:12 PDT 2013 -->
