Return-Path: X-Original-To: bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 026F821F86D7 for ; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 02:52:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.023 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.023 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.575, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] 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 wHhXJf2b1axA for ; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 02:52:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ams-iport-2.cisco.com (ams-iport-2.cisco.com [144.254.224.141]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65D1721F87D4 for ; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 02:52:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=tomkrist@cisco.com; l=6297; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1331632348; x=1332841948; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references: in-reply-to; bh=dMecdzRKDAjlPoQ8LyTjw2D/C02Trg0wtGnURnKqf8A=; b=b1wecf5ZjgTC6kzG6hXhMFl5xXHmpQ6Lq62wHw/MexEjqxlAH/oYqC7u XE/6lgcCmIweDKnZjTPsPu0oxSvWF8HfIO6u2jTY69j+ZAVEcGkZUs+HS UqPIP+20zN0vTwrbq1laskocBKZSIESdF8Rkt1+Hj9jgj3yXhGdB59wqP k=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhoGAHEYX0+Q/khM/2dsb2JhbABDgwmyV4EHggkBAQEEEgFVEBELGAkWDwkDAgECAUUTBgIBAR6Fb4F5C51nAZ8JkGUElU+FaYo6gmaBWw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.73,576,1325462400"; d="scan'208,217"; a="68329969" Received: from ams-core-3.cisco.com ([144.254.72.76]) by ams-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 13 Mar 2012 09:52:27 +0000 Received: from [10.61.82.138] (ams3-vpn-dhcp4747.cisco.com [10.61.82.138]) by ams-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q2D9qR5m008637 for ; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 09:52:27 GMT Message-ID: <4F5F18DA.2000503@cisco.com> Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 10:52:26 +0100 From: Tom Kristensen Organization: Cisco User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.15) Gecko/20101027 Fedora/3.0.10-1.fc12 Lightning/1.0b2pre Thunderbird/3.0.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bfcpbis@ietf.org References: <20120312223331.20764.8172.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20120312223331.20764.8172.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------090600050305060406040904" Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4582bis-02.txt X-BeenThere: bfcpbis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: BFCPBIS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 09:52:30 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------090600050305060406040904 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 03/12/2012 11:33 PM, internet-drafts@ietf.org 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 Working Group of the IETF. > > Title : The Binary Floor Control Protocol (BFCP) > Author(s) : Tom Kristensen > Filename : draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4582bis-02.txt > Pages : 85 > Date : 2012-03-12 > > Floor control is a means to manage joint or exclusive access to > shared resources in a (multiparty) conferencing environment. > Thereby, floor control complements other functions -- such as > conference and media session setup, conference policy manipulation, > and media control -- that are realized by other protocols. > > This document specifies the Binary Floor Control Protocol (BFCP). > BFCP is used between floor participants and floor control servers, > and between floor chairs (i.e., moderators) and floor control > servers. > > This document obsoletes RFC 4582. Changes from RFC 4582 are > summarized in section 16. > The draft is now restructured as agreed in the interim meeting and (silently) confirmed on list, i.e. diff style changes merged in from the -01 version of the draft. No technical changes in the extensions for reliable transport, just some minor - more editorial - clarifications of the text. The tools page diff tool seems to work fine. Changes from RFC 4582 displayed side-by-side this way: The (non-normative) overview of changes from RFC 4582 is contained in Section 16: Please, review and provide any comments that will make this overview of changes more useful and clear. When creating the XML equivalent to RFC 4582 - as starting point, I stumbled upon a couple of typos and bugs in the final RFC 4582. These are listed in Section 16. I will especially ask for review and confirmation of the last fix in the list: Corrected attribute type (Section 13.1.1 ): Change from PARTICIPANT-PROVIDED-INFO to PRIORITY attributed in the ninth paragraph, since the note below describes priority and that the last paragraph deals with PARTICIPANT-PROVIDED-INFO. -- Tom --------------090600050305060406040904 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 03/12/2012 11:33 PM, internet-drafts@ietf.org 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  Working Group of the IETF.

	Title           : The Binary Floor Control Protocol (BFCP)
	Author(s)       : Tom Kristensen
	Filename        : draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4582bis-02.txt
	Pages           : 85
	Date            : 2012-03-12

   Floor control is a means to manage joint or exclusive access to
   shared resources in a (multiparty) conferencing environment.
   Thereby, floor control complements other functions -- such as
   conference and media session setup, conference policy manipulation,
   and media control -- that are realized by other protocols.

   This document specifies the Binary Floor Control Protocol (BFCP).
   BFCP is used between floor participants and floor control servers,
   and between floor chairs (i.e., moderators) and floor control
   servers.

   This document obsoletes RFC 4582.  Changes from RFC 4582 are
   summarized in section 16.
The draft is now restructured as agreed in the interim meeting and (silently) confirmed on list, i.e. diff style changes merged in from the -01 version of the draft. No technical changes in the extensions for reliable transport, just some minor - more editorial - clarifications of the text.

The tools page diff tool seems to work fine. Changes from RFC 4582 displayed side-by-side this way:
  <URL: http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4582bis-02.txt&url1=http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4582.txt >

The (non-normative) overview of changes from RFC 4582 is contained in Section 16:
 <URL: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4582bis-02#section-16 >

Please, review and provide any comments that will make this overview of changes more useful and clear.

When creating the XML equivalent to RFC 4582 - as starting point, I stumbled upon a couple of typos and bugs in the final RFC 4582. These are listed in Section 16. I will especially ask for review and confirmation of the last fix in the list:

Corrected attribute type  (Section 13.1.1):
      Change from PARTICIPANT-PROVIDED-INFO to PRIORITY attributed in
      the ninth paragraph, since the note below describes priority and
      that the last paragraph deals with PARTICIPANT-PROVIDED-INFO.

-- Tom



--------------090600050305060406040904--