Re: [nm-wg] delay/loss related RFC's

["Jeff W. Boote" <boote@internet2.edu>]

Dan Gunter wrote:
> In trying to map these RFC's to concrete (XML) messages certain issues
> still come up, though. That's where I think we are now.

I was specifically referring to the issue of including lost packets as
part of the delay distribution.

Is that an XML issue? Is it hard to have a "special value" that means
infinity? Or is this the first "special value" to come up in the context
of data values in the schemas... If so, perhaps that is where we should
be directing this discussion? I would think there may be reasons to have
at least a "missing value" for most data sets.

jeff