Re: [alto] Second WGLC for cost-calendar

Jensen Zhang <jingxuan.n.zhang@gmail.com> Fri, 22 February 2019 17:27 UTC

Return-Path: <jingxuan.n.zhang@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: alto@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: alto@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DF02130F27 for <alto@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 09:27:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id c61ZW4sptPeW for <alto@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 09:27:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yb1-xb30.google.com (mail-yb1-xb30.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b30]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB285130F3C for <alto@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 09:27:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yb1-xb30.google.com with SMTP id f196so1145009yba.5 for <alto@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 09:27:49 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=+zbnv6CDc2CgNR1l0xLT2RLQuszEUhu4gSEdKxk71Ck=; b=hR+ZLLWjZIK/O83sO6oftNi5H+bKiR5pYw30xSNNlU7cl6PxE837OJqo2GXlVqVrfd 0NTmITd7cjQJbL1WS+mfX/2dI+Vqc5JsMsadbCUDoHJlHamCGiDL9rHhJe6DejR2qldf BzLU33JIr76yeMSb3nOZFtsEW3LeooKuW72ExWiYqoRUqzlKyiqqdh4DwpIvAGef4UNh L4Qwv4nKvtHdap1EVuI5nzRVlhs3o4LXr/+yMFTU8ChjEAEdy3R0LrP5lS2HDD6veE5S UcFQcncdL8eewsR5Yjw7uBUiovPBWC8viG30oknYQHm5eqFjrfmEJJ14jfU+lDo9jQIH o5ag==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=+zbnv6CDc2CgNR1l0xLT2RLQuszEUhu4gSEdKxk71Ck=; b=OEO/Zh6slhgDndp4269Bqep+eHBwZk440GPFiqOF7HUZ4XEwETwhN7LfdDzjlLs5Pe H7cLFPP6wGSzZ+ZebMry6OFQg8vO/bmepPAuLasQk4VA2QXW3oItAh/c4MH+2XYMaiw8 rALp/a+AU2yTwnp2NOLksNPezH5RCIoZVxwgfh+SQ1Tv5bgiUZ/v3V2B1YB15VmCsQis I1dsMK0BepdZ6IEJIT3Z4w9Au/KEJ1vHlgfb/ww6VDLXk/irZJDj505I5y1c7UB4XfoQ TnvwTBUOJKZubDXCxPT2t18MDRtjzWJj0m1k8wF0mnA7Ko1svkz52YPhyyQf9s2K/u8E TVsA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuZfcGBuHizLpfLbWc+xWiJPw0SR1l4PMTNkHy1lGW0V9zfWmm8t 8hZQFCd3bzC9B9EyBXJbmSRvFC7SqRLvdoS+5pw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IaWhIcFcOlFxONYM5hg2CC6ZJfTRTVGDNDFhSMGj87y+wCZYTxPTOln83y6mPYN7WwoqgdbC4BzCrxDLW0ROoo=
X-Received: by 2002:a25:c589:: with SMTP id v131mr4457583ybe.65.1550856468656; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 09:27:48 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAMMTW_KtVLEo4RYtxVAo8+MEvApAPVLPPQ62ACV_dOU2NWJhfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAMMTW_+r50k2++8FBMeYsC-w9L2ocp0O5ebiB7OL8ENfOfugJg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMMTW_+r50k2++8FBMeYsC-w9L2ocp0O5ebiB7OL8ENfOfugJg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jensen Zhang <jingxuan.n.zhang@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 12:27:42 -0500
Message-ID: <CAAbpuyr_h93gn=cotsuh0=NK-_wcCaFG=WLVzGe1H2XpQ8yaYw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Vijay Gurbani <vijay.gurbani@gmail.com>
Cc: IETF ALTO <alto@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e9794805827ee877"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/DC5Tlw-1y3gSjFp4vkqE9KfSHWs>
Subject: Re: [alto] Second WGLC for cost-calendar
X-BeenThere: alto@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Application-Layer Traffic Optimization \(alto\) WG mailing list" <alto.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/alto>, <mailto:alto-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/alto/>
List-Post: <mailto:alto@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:alto-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto>, <mailto:alto-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 17:27:54 -0000

Hi ALTOers,

I checked the JSON examples in draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-10. And I saw
the following syntax errors still left in the latest document:

In the IRD example in Sec 3.3,
- "meta/cost-types/num-throughputrating/cost-metric"
and "meta/cost-types/string-servicestatus/cost-metric" have trailing commas.
- missing a comma between
"resources/filtered-cost-map-calendar/calendar-attributes" and
"resources/filtered-cost-map-calendar/uses".

In the FCM response example in Sec 4.1.3,
- missing a pair of { } inside the list value of
"meta/calendar-response-attributes".

In the ECS response example in Sec 4.2.3,
- "meta/calendar-response-attributes" has a trailing comma.

In the Multi-Cost ECS response example in Sec 4.2.4,
- missing a comma between
"meta/calendar-response-attributes/cost-type-names" and
"meta/calendar-response-attributes/calendar-start-time".
- "meta/calendar-response-attributes" has a trailing comma.

After fixed the syntax issues above, I used cURL to check the
Content-Length for all JSON examples. But I cannot get the same value as
the document gives.

Following is my result. But the Content-Length value for the response JSON
should be wrong. Because I just left the symbols "v1, v2, ..." but not the
concrete values in the JSON.

./cost-cal-ecs-req.json
> Content-Length: 290
./cost-cal-ecs-res.json
> Content-Length: 557
./cost-cal-fcm-req.json
> Content-Length: 208
./cost-cal-fcm-res.json
> Content-Length: 689
./cost-cal-ird.json
> Content-Length: 2542
./cost-cal-mcecs-req.json
> Content-Length: 373
./cost-cal-mcecs-res.json
> Content-Length: 967

My script and JSON files for the Content-Length checking can be found in my
Gist: https://gist.github.com/fno2010/9d4ac11ff268a83011f7d0bcf5bd44e2

Sabine, you told me you replaced the symbols "v1, v2, ..." by specific
values to evaluate the content-length. Not sure which values you
were using. But you can modify the JSON files and rerun my script to
evaluate the Content-Length.

Best,
Jensen


On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 1:16 PM Vijay Gurbani <vijay.gurbani@gmail.com>;
wrote:

> Folks: The WGLC period is about to expire and so far no one has posted
> anything to the list.  It is imperative that we have some folks looking at
> the drafts as we move them along.  I do realize everyone is busy, please
> kindly take a few minutes to look at the diffs and post anything that seems
> remiss to the list.
>
> Thank you.
>
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 9:54 AM Vijay Gurbani <vijay.gurbani@gmail.com>;
> wrote:
>
>> Folks: During the IESG review of cost-calendar, substantial comments were
>> made that requires a second WGLC for this draft.  Pursuant to the second
>> WGLC, we will resend the draft to the IESG.
>>
>> The IESG comments are captured in [1].  The authors of cost-calendar have
>> revised the draft to address these comments and the new draft (version -10)
>> is available at [2].
>>
>> This email serves as a second WGLC for cost-calendar and will run from
>> Mon, Feb 11 2019 to Mon, Feb 25 2019.  During this two week period, please
>> examine carefully the revised version and post any comments or discussions
>> to the list, even if you have no comments, a simple email to the list
>> saying that you have examined the changes and the draft is ready to proceed
>> is helpful.
>>
>> To help you save time, you can examine the diffs between -09 and -10 at
>> [3].
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> [1]
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar/ballot/
>> [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar/
>> [3]
>> https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-10.txt
>>
> _______________________________________________
> alto mailing list
> alto@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
>