Re: [bfcpbis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-08.txt

["Ram Mohan R (rmohanr)" <[e-mail]>]

I just published a new revision addressing the comments below. Here is the
diff.

https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-09


Regards,
Ram

-----Original Message-----
From: bfcpbis <[e-mail]> on behalf of Cisco Employee
<[e-mail]>
Date: Wednesday, 8 June 2016 at 10:14 AM
To: Victor Pascual <[e-mail]>, "Gonzalo Salgueiro
(gsalguei)" <[e-mail]>
Cc: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "Charles Eckel (eckelcu)"
<[e-mail]>, Paul Kyzivat <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-08.txt

>Works for me as well.
>
>Thanks,
>Ram
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: bfcpbis <[e-mail]> on behalf of Victor Pascual
><[e-mail]>
>Date: Tuesday, 7 June 2016 at 11:46 PM
>To: "Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei)" <[e-mail]>
>Cc: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "Charles Eckel (eckelcu)"
><[e-mail]>, Paul Kyzivat <[e-mail]>
>Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] I-D Action:
>draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-08.txt
>
>>Fine with me
>>
>>> On 07 Jun 2016, at 20:12, Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei)
>>><[e-mail]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I¹m OK with that approach.  I also agree that they are entirely too
>>>different in purpose to try and merge them.
>>> 
>>> -G
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Jun 7, 2016, at 1:41 PM, Charles Eckel (eckelcu)
>>>><[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> (As an individual)
>>>> 
>>>> Good question. I agree it seems a bit strange. But my thinking is that
>>>>our use of ³Updates² may not be appropriate. I view RFC 4582 and RFC
>>>>4583 as defining BFCP over TCP and over UDP. This draft takes BFCP over
>>>>TCP and defines how to encapsulate it within a WebSocket and how to
>>>>negotiate that encapsulation. So I think these drafts are related but
>>>>separate, and that we should remove the ³Updates² label and simply have
>>>>RFC4582bis and RFC4583bis as normative references (as they already
>>>>are). Thoughts?
>>>> 
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Charles
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On 6/1/16, 7:14 AM, "bfcpbis on behalf of Paul Kyzivat"
>>>>><[e-mail] on behalf of [e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> I have a question.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> This document updates RFC4582bis and RFC4583bis.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Those documents are *drafts*. Does it really make sense to handle the
>>>>> changes this way? I guess that means that this document will need to
>>>>>be 
>>>>> held until they become RFCs, and then it can update them.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Wouldn't it make more sense to simply make the changes in those
>>>>>drafts 
>>>>> now, before they become RFCs?
>>>>> 
>>>>>    Thanks,
>>>>>    Paul
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 6/1/16 2:51 AM, [e-mail] wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
>>>>>>directories.
>>>>>> This draft is a work item of the Binary Floor Control Protocol Bis
>>>>>>of the IETF.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>       Title           : The WebSocket Protocol as a Transport for
>>>>>>the Binary Floor Control Protocol (BFCP)
>>>>>>       Authors         : Victor Pascual
>>>>>>                         Antón Román
>>>>>>                         Stéphane Cazeaux
>>>>>>                         Gonzalo Salgueiro
>>>>>>                         Ram Mohan Ravindranath
>>>>>>                         Sergio Garcia Murillo
>>>>>>    Filename        : draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-08.txt
>>>>>>    Pages           : 13
>>>>>>    Date            : 2016-05-31
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Abstract:
>>>>>>  The WebSocket protocol enables two-way realtime communication
>>>>>>between
>>>>>>  clients and servers.  This document specifies a new WebSocket sub-
>>>>>>  protocol as a reliable transport mechanism between Binary Floor
>>>>>>  Control Protocol (BFCP) entities to enable usage of BFCP in new
>>>>>>  scenarios.  This document updates RFC4582bis and RFC4583bis.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket/
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> There's also a htmlized version available at:
>>>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-08
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-0
>>>>>>8
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
>>>>>>submission
>>>>>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>>>>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> bfcpbis mailing list
>>>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bfcpbis
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> bfcpbis mailing list
>>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bfcpbis
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> bfcpbis mailing list
>>>> [e-mail]
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bfcpbis
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> bfcpbis mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bfcpbis
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>bfcpbis mailing list
>>[e-mail]
>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bfcpbis
>
>_______________________________________________
>bfcpbis mailing list
>[e-mail]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bfcpbis