Re: [AVTCORE] Review of draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-02

Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> Fri, 18 September 2015 16:17 UTC

Return-Path: <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
X-Original-To: avt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: avt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBDB11A0372 for <avt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 09:17:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.235
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.235 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no
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 oKCpkas6UVXM for <avt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 09:17:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from resqmta-ch2-01v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-ch2-01v.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:33]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D45FB1A01BA for <avt@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 09:17:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from resomta-ch2-17v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.113]) by resqmta-ch2-01v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id JgHe1r0022TL4Rh01gHyKY; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 16:17:58 +0000
Received: from Paul-Kyzivats-MacBook-Pro.local ([50.138.229.151]) by resomta-ch2-17v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id JgHx1r00M3Ge9ey01gHxlP; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 16:17:58 +0000
To: avt@ietf.org
References: <55894FE8.6080406@ericsson.com> <55FB1E25.7020702@acm.org>
From: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <55FC3935.6050605@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 12:17:57 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <55FB1E25.7020702@acm.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20140121; t=1442593078; bh=jZl2Eqi8pDIZ63Dk/VTrNX45bf2J0EOcojYL+pD8yQY=; h=Received:Received:Subject:To:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version: Content-Type; b=UUjGx4vL42hukFV0kD/UrBHclZCKRwj3LhH2uI5dZ5zMgtqnGP4MYPrF9iJ6BGRVv yteaBmxoMxsnuEZqCY0w15g+ho5ZvxU6sdyMLldEu6t2FphzfOSHm82ek8OHI1lBGI p/IO/RnPFvDfiqh4EOzlB9++yGa5UkBhiF7X5I2hSI3jeDv/EC40k11Ntmm3HTAFe1 Ut4rX54O0F/8sCa/sLqkRnWTyohFQKPauWfyHUZkbH5T5hHhD9nz7v/G349P5LSzxX NigCWNhtnRLTd6caY2ZXDwXSgGZLAG4jH8RsbWOlX5uXj8JpfxlvG5sfdkhS2wN37C 6DLZdNEoxJfMw==
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/avt/lkCh73xKm5kVXqGAQP8O5BYwaVU>
Subject: Re: [AVTCORE] Review of draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-02
X-BeenThere: avt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 16:18:00 -0000

On 9/17/15 4:10 PM, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote:

>> K. Section 3:
>>
>> When new values or ranges are added, they MUST be tested in
>> ascending order.
>>
>
> This text should not talk about adding new values/ranges. Changed the text to:
>
> "The various range values for the first byte MUST be tested in ascending order."

I just reviewed this, and I have no idea what it means. I see nothing 
about Figure 3 that requires testing to be done in a particular order. 
The *text* suggests an if/then/else or switch statement implementation. 
But the code generated for a switch statement may well be a lookup table 
and so have no particular ordering.

The only time ordering would matter would be if the ranges overlapped. 
And IIUC the goal here that the ranges *not* overlap.

	Thanks,
	Paul