Nevertheless, in October the two sides came to an agreement, broadly on the lines of the earlier Ikhshidid proposal: al-Ikhshid acknowledged Hamdanid control over northern Syria and even consented to sending an annual tribute in exchange for Sayf al-Dawla's renunciation of all claims on Damascus. The Hamdanid ruler was also to marry one of al-Ikhshid's daughters or nieces. For al-Ikhshid, the maintenance of Aleppo was less important than southern Syria with Damascus, which was Egypt's eastern bulwark. Provided that these remained under his control, he was more than willing to allow the existence of a Hamdanid state in the north. The Egyptian ruler knew that he would have difficulty in asserting and maintaining control over northern Syria and Cilicia, which had traditionally been influenced more by Upper Mesopotamia and Iraq. By abandoning its claims on these distant provinces, not only would Egypt be spared the cost of maintaining a large army there, but the Hamdanid emirate would also fulfil the useful role of a buffer state against incursions from both Iraq and a resurgent Byzantine Empire. Indeed, throughout al-Ikhshid's rule, and that of his successors, relations with the Byzantines were quite friendly, as the lack of a common border and the common hostility to the Fatimids guaranteed that the interests of the two states did not clash. Despite Sayf al-Dawla's attempt to push again into southern Syria soon after al-Ikhshid's death, the border agreed in 945 held, and even outlived both dynasties, forming the dividing line between Mesopotamian-influenced northern Syria and the Egyptian-controlled southern part of the country until the Mamluks seized the entire region in 1260.