IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [AVTCORE] New Version Notification for draft-rescorla-avtcore-6222bis-00.txt

Kevin Gross <kevin.gross@avanw.com> Sat, 09 March 2013 03:35 UTC

Return-Path: <kevin.gross@avanw.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 BC07F21F86F2 for <avt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Mar 2013 19:35:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.436
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.436 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=3.078, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HeJb4B3Wh0M0 for <avt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Mar 2013 19:35:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from oproxy9.bluehost.com (oproxy9.bluehost.com [69.89.24.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id A75CA21F86C8 for <avt@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Mar 2013 19:35:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 25439 invoked by uid 0); 9 Mar 2013 03:34:40 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO host291.hostmonster.com) (74.220.215.91) by oproxy9.bluehost.com with SMTP; 9 Mar 2013 03:34:40 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=avanw.com; s=default; h=Content-Type:Cc:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Date:References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version; bh=SGynIqWrQZkQ3XOMO7DEgF+XddpssqYn5cd10e3TvBc=; b=TUukJpLM4okchiYhc+zikVlykZsTtXry/Ls9zGJ4lOofzZESmT35ASLTN7ghKV6t3pxDXQM3yqmWHCV90DZ5J8bLhft/3rrPqwsG3b9emt4kcK89yhYXdltrKGaNHZGE;
Received: from [209.85.223.174] (port=64384 helo=mail-ie0-f174.google.com) by host291.hostmonster.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <kevin.gross@avanw.com>) id 1UEAYS-0007lu-5L for avt@ietf.org; Fri, 08 Mar 2013 20:34:40 -0700
Received: by mail-ie0-f174.google.com with SMTP id k10so2890547iea.33 for <avt@ietf.org>; Fri, 08 Mar 2013 19:34:39 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.108.235 with SMTP id hn11mr1037630igb.107.1362800079344; Fri, 08 Mar 2013 19:34:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.50.183.163 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Mar 2013 19:34:39 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <C15918F2FCDA0243A7C919DA7C4BE9940CF4DA00@xmb-aln-x01.cisco.com>
References: <C15918F2FCDA0243A7C919DA7C4BE994F67420@xmb-aln-x01.cisco.com> <C15918F2FCDA0243A7C919DA7C4BE9940CDE16EA@xmb-aln-x01.cisco.com> <CALw1_Q3sBkDeAQMd1MKV1rC4fK4nSAvd88WN_EJXMdh2tSO7UQ@mail.gmail.com> <C15918F2FCDA0243A7C919DA7C4BE9940CF487E3@xmb-aln-x01.cisco.com> <CALw1_Q18jQorUEO_UzZmB83XUFQ7NQCEAVfsL+ZdH3BcmzN86w@mail.gmail.com> <C15918F2FCDA0243A7C919DA7C4BE9940CF4DA00@xmb-aln-x01.cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2013 20:34:39 -0700
Message-ID: <CALw1_Q2UV-Fbevq8GBGoA6ixEQ-33QEHE7-=TZcXCT5Kn3QEVg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Kevin Gross <kevin.gross@avanw.com>
To: "Ali C. Begen (abegen)" <abegen@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f46d0402aeefa1223804d7759ea8"
X-Identified-User: {1416:host291.hostmonster.com:avanwcom:avanw.com} {sentby:smtp auth 209.85.223.174 authed with kevin.gross@avanw.com}
Cc: "avt@ietf.org" <avt@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [AVTCORE] New Version Notification for draft-rescorla-avtcore-6222bis-00.txt
X-BeenThere: avt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Sat, 09 Mar 2013 03:35:12 -0000

Stuff below

Kevin Gross
+1-303-447-0517
Media Network Consultant
AVA Networks - www.AVAnw.com <http://www.avanw.com/>, www.X192.org


On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Ali C. Begen (abegen) <abegen@cisco.com>wrote:

>
> On Mar 8, 2013, at 3:19 AM, Kevin Gross <kevin.gross@avanw.com> wrote:
>
> > That's technically sound. Editorially speaking, this new (b) method is
> already described in the third bullet point in section 4.2. Hopefully the
> authors can find a way to reference that instead of repeating it.
> >
> Editorially, I like the straightforward version, if you don't mind.
>

Author's choice as far as I'm concerned.


>
> > Separately, I note that section 5 allows you to create unique
> identifiers with more than 96 bits. I now don't see anywhere where you're
> allowed to use more than 96 bits so I question why we include that
> flexibility.
>
> That part says "to compromise between packet size and uniqueness - refer
> to Section 6.1". So, I think if one does not care about the packet size, he
> can use longer bits.
>
> It also says "the least significant 96 bits are used to generate an identifier".
To resolve this, we're first going to need to clarify the language here.
"Are" needs to be changed to SHOULD or SHALL. This language problem exists
in the other two bullet points in section 4.2. If we choose SHOULD, that
gives implementations leeway to use longer (or shorter) per-session CNAMES
and I will rethdraw my comment. I had been reading "are" and "is" in these
paragraphs as SHALL. Do you think the draft intended SHOULD or SHALL for
these requirements?

v2.35.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status