James Kempf: 2) Section 6.4.6, 4th paragraph - I just went through
this in Seamoby. I think exponential backoff would be a better
retransmit algorithm than max messages. I'm suprised Allison or Thomas
didn't catch this. What do you think? If you think so, then try RFC
2608 for text.

--------

Jari Arkko: I have changed the draft to use an exponential backoff
process. Here's the new text:


    In these situations, the host MAY send a Certification Path
    Solicitation message to retrieve the path.  If there is no
    response within CPS_RETRY seconds, the message should be
    retried. The wait interval for each subsequent retransmission MUST
    exponentially increase, doubling each time.  If there is no
    response after CPS_RETRY_MAX seconds, the host abandons the
    certification path retrieval process. If the host receives only a
    part of a certification path within CPS_RETRY_FRAGMENTS seconds of
    receiving the first part, it MAY in addition transmit a
    Certification Path Solicitation message with the Component field
    set to a value not equal to 65,535. This message can be
    retransmitted using the same process as in the initial message. If
    there are multiple missing certificates, additional such CPS
    messages can be sent after getting a response to first
    one. However, the complete retrieval process may last at most
    CPS_RETRY_MAX seconds.

--------