<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Hi Rakesh<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div dir="ltr" style="font-size:12.8px" class=""><div class="">However, I'm not sure how it is in violation of guideline.</div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div><div>There isn’t a guideline. It’s just how strategy is designed. ndnSIM 1.0’s strategy can control almost everything. NFD’s strategy is designed to only have control over Interest forwarding.</div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div dir="ltr" style="font-size:12.8px" class=""><div class="">Let me try to cite a scenario:</div><div class="">If the forwarding strategy finds queue on a particular outgoing data face is congested and it wants to defer the forwarding to a later time (say next data packet arrival for same face or a timer which ever occurs first).</div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div><div>Strategy currently has no way to stop a Data from being forwarded onto a congested link.</div><div>As explained in #<a href="https://redmine.named-data.net/issues/3797#note-37" class="">3797-37</a>, a Data may satisfy multiple Interests, and those Interests may belong to multiple strategies. Therefore, not a single strategy has the authority to control how the Data is forwarded.</div><div>However, if <a href="https://redmine.named-data.net/issues/3333" class="">Interest digest </a>is adopted, each Data satisfies only one Interest, and then strategy could have control over Data forwarding.</div></div><br class=""></div><div class="">Yours, Junxiao</div></body></html>