Re: [AVTCORE] Francesca Palombini's No Objection on draft-ietf-avtcore-multi-party-rtt-mix-18: (with COMMENT)

Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 19 May 2021 13:48 UTC

Return-Path: <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: avt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: avt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E8EF3A1053; Wed, 19 May 2021 06:48:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 bNOHV6B9xedq; Wed, 19 May 2021 06:48:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yb1-xb2c.google.com (mail-yb1-xb2c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b2c]) (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 3A1873A1052; Wed, 19 May 2021 06:48:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yb1-xb2c.google.com with SMTP id i4so18201207ybe.2; Wed, 19 May 2021 06:48:34 -0700 (PDT)
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=V6nzDgff2FWh/KvWvFqdJ22mFfrBITHuNChfPMuTq3s=; b=RwJfToZozZYQ6cp8jqNTyQ8UuwNBgYt4ZOWrTxWWA3UBDmuJ25+gbjYQSp9jQ4kzAG YH8N1InJkOsh8UQy/0mH+EzXBQb702n3xpgHn2+U8KsTb7RzcTIWYfCYUvcWZGio6xPQ 8/CB8qR9lubNzSaX64awLGr6Yo7LymsnduaDiuJ0HIqbItCoNESJ48nHaxJwdtdZ5Bk7 /VoDZbPtcNcQfHnspMlAUa9GWQyMazmbYsXNx4QIvYCJI2Y/UHwlH1N7inm9cgPRPp6R fRTQok4PAkX2OEZe5e5QPxM4bPS6MAaqkUaElam3sPWmNxuqNOZvtfz2CM0xPGFoo2qv +cnQ==
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=V6nzDgff2FWh/KvWvFqdJ22mFfrBITHuNChfPMuTq3s=; b=FG9cJwsCV7BqFaAoaRLkwZOX9Q4t1ecv+pxSced4QQ2b7yds9hh06cPw64oJjwtWsx u3jxCgdZLi2zrbK1/G/oVHzUKyz87pxULPN10neb2qagX2N5sB1zbm4XYlvdWhWF4pkw fscN77RdxIjbm5caGDarSQKyj8ctZ4eDReYHQ49I2M7xves4tq0m+hfMNonxhNQVGZtM No5h2+FgLQ8r2bEvm5Iy5+DsGbsgwpUpRI/+uUM9FiGfoonSzElHX8CF7I5uVb0MsSA0 qYJUX7GSvXqUP/xd1gLkFPUy1wkz8sxJnS+UP4IW4nB3T4NsNt2jlbtjUvR0TJZNxZX8 srJg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533fGG9D7F/vOrKhQRumt2B8GXVGY2zQRu12ZuR0hqvbDuqZin9P 9AfiPHz/Gxo+EaXqjv9BAwkkFiPCVNVJ4eP3gtA=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwtrkzOOTm46BZXmLNXOyESBChsAa3Ax7PP8+aM3PqN83m6rOwNumR5ACAZz2tGdA9eNGPIrqy4ZgQxzocJua8=
X-Received: by 2002:a5b:f50:: with SMTP id y16mr16373608ybr.297.1621432112293; Wed, 19 May 2021 06:48:32 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <162137008198.8563.14104995910062091869@ietfa.amsl.com> <e0a8256f-976a-3b95-7f50-2e37f5f3bead@ghaccess.se>
In-Reply-To: <e0a8256f-976a-3b95-7f50-2e37f5f3bead@ghaccess.se>
From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 May 2021 08:48:06 -0500
Message-ID: <CAKKJt-fWiJYDr3AU-8jcENSXCsNfHADd-BrgT+GARyekWFmNOg@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Gunnar_Hellstr=C3=B6m?= <gunnar.hellstrom@ghaccess.se>
Cc: Francesca Palombini <francesca.palombini@ericsson.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, avtcore-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-avtcore-multi-party-rtt-mix@ietf.org, IETF AVTCore WG <avt@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000014aa7c05c2af15c6"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/avt/9KS3RQzKEw-eqBIRUWrBcInGUVM>
Subject: Re: [AVTCORE] Francesca Palombini's No Objection on draft-ietf-avtcore-multi-party-rtt-mix-18: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: avt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Audio/Video Transport Core Maintenance <avt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/avt/>
List-Post: <mailto:avt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 May 2021 13:48:40 -0000

I apologize for asking, but ...

On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 4:43 PM Gunnar Hellström <
gunnar.hellstrom@ghaccess.se> wrote:

> Francesca,
>
> thank you for your review. I will answer your question 6 here, and
> follow up soon with a new version with actions on all comments.
>
> Den 2021-05-18 kl. 22:34, skrev Francesca Palombini via Datatracker:
> > Francesca Palombini has entered the following ballot position for
> > draft-ietf-avtcore-multi-party-rtt-mix-18: No Objection
> >
> > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> > introductory paragraph, however.)
> >
> >
> > Please refer to
> https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> > for more information about DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> >
> >
> > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-avtcore-multi-party-rtt-mix/
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > COMMENT:
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Thank you for the work on this document. I have some minor non-blocking
> > comments (feel free to take them or leave them), but I'd like some
> response to
> > point 6. about the normative MUST.
> >
> > Francesca
> ....
> > 6. -----
> >
> >     the stream.  Some of them are optional.  Implementations MUST be able
> >     to ignore optional control codes that they do not support.
> >
> > FP: I am really unsure how this MUST can be verified for
> interoperability.
> > Maybe this does not need to be a BCP 14 MUST?
>

Gunnar,

When I read your response to Francesca's comment, my next question was
whether an implementation should always ignore optional control codes that
they do not support, if *not* ignoring them just cause problems, displays
garbage characters, etc.

If that's correct, I'm not Francesca, of course, but I'd think
"Implementations MUST ignore optional control codes that they do not
support" would be verifiable for interoperability, and would justify a BCP
14 MUST..

Best,

Spencer


> Yes, this MUST is intended to be a normative MUST. And it is very
> important but not that complicated to properly ignore unsupported
> control codes.
>
> The control codes are specified in ITU-T T.140, in turn referencing to
> ISO 6429. The control codes often consist of a special leading
> character, followed by a parameter consisting of normal text characters,
> and then a final special character.
>
> Ignoring an unsupported control code means that the app needs to
> understand the structure of control codes, so that it ignores everything
> from the leading special character to and including the final special
> character.
>
> It would be incorrect and cause garbage in the display or even
> malfunction if it just ignored the leading special character and then
> interpreted the characters in the parameter as if it was text and tried
> to present it.
>
> The control codes can imply change in color or blinking or other visible
> effects in the text, and it is said that such effects are optional.
>
>
> Would more explaining text be required for this section?
>
>
> Regards
>
> Gunnar
>
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Audio/Video Transport Core Maintenance
> > avt@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt
>
> --
> Gunnar Hellström
> GHAccess
> gunnar.hellstrom@ghaccess.se
>
> _______________________________________________
> Audio/Video Transport Core Maintenance
> avt@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt
>