[sblair]

Hey Milton,

I generally try to write very permissive responders so that even if something is not strictly following the standard I can be accepting of it so it doesn't look like the product is broken, even if it is the controllers fault.

So given that, I believe #1 is completely acceptable as it shouldn't break anything.

I will admit in my own implementations #2 is what would have happened in this corner cause because I first check destination addressing and if it isn't a broadcast or my matching UID then I would have stopped parsing the packet.

#3 is absolutely the wrong thing to do. There should never be a NACK to a UNIQ_BRANCH message. As Eric said, this could cause a break on the line or also in the rush of other responders potentially sending NACK's too it would cause corrupted data and trigger the Controller to start going down invalid branches and could potentially break discovery completely.