none
[MS-PST] BID "r" bit RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hi.

    MS-PST v20100218 Section 2.2.2.2 "BID (Block ID)" states

    r (1 bit): Reserved bit. Readers MUST ignore this bit and treat it as zero (0) before looking up the BID from the BBT. Writers MUST set this bit to zero (0).

    Questions:

    1. Is the requirement to ignore / treat as zero also applicable in reference to BIDs in the NBT?

    2. Is there some Windows specific behaviour here? I'm seeing files that have the low bit (bitmask 0x0000000000000001) in the BID set.

    3. Is comparison of the BID in the BREF (See Section 2.2.2.4) to BID in the PAGETRAILER (See Section 2.2.2.7.1) supposed to ignore the r bit? That is, could the BIDs differ by just the r bit and still be a "match"

    Thanks

    Brad

    Saturday, March 20, 2010 9:07 AM

Answers

  • Hi Brad,

    Thanks for your question.

    The documentation is correct as stated to Ignore the "r" bit.  Therefore, the answers to your questions are:

    1.       Yes.

    2.       This is implementation specific and we have no current plans to document this behavior.

    3.       Yes.

    Regards,

    Mark Miller

    Escalation Engineer

    US-CSS DSC PROTOCOL TEAM

    • Marked as answer by Brad Hards Tuesday, March 23, 2010 11:07 PM
    Tuesday, March 23, 2010 8:19 PM

All replies

  • Hi Brad:

    A member of protocol documentation team will be in touch soon.


    Regards, Obaid Farooqi
    Saturday, March 20, 2010 7:57 PM
    Owner
  • Hi Brad,

    I am investigating this issue and will follow up with you soon.

    Regards,

    Mark Miller

    Escalation Engineer

    US-CSS DSC PROTOCOL TEAM

     

    • Marked as answer by Brad Hards Tuesday, March 23, 2010 11:07 PM
    • Unmarked as answer by Brad Hards Tuesday, March 23, 2010 11:07 PM
    Tuesday, March 23, 2010 3:00 PM
  • Hi Brad,

    Thanks for your question.

    The documentation is correct as stated to Ignore the "r" bit.  Therefore, the answers to your questions are:

    1.       Yes.

    2.       This is implementation specific and we have no current plans to document this behavior.

    3.       Yes.

    Regards,

    Mark Miller

    Escalation Engineer

    US-CSS DSC PROTOCOL TEAM

    • Marked as answer by Brad Hards Tuesday, March 23, 2010 11:07 PM
    Tuesday, March 23, 2010 8:19 PM
  • Mark,

    Thanks for the answer (and glad to see you back from the "glueShoe").

    Given your answer for Q2, it is probably appropriate to add a product behaviour specific note to this part of Section 2.2.2.2 (along the lines of product note <<4>>), given the MUST terms being used.

    As a separate issue, I'd request that this behaviour be documented at a future time. There (obviously) some meaning to that bit, and that information could be of some use in some circumstances.

    Brad

     

    Tuesday, March 23, 2010 11:07 PM