Re: [bfcpbis] WGLC on draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-06

"Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <eckelcu@cisco.com> Tue, 31 May 2016 21:31 UTC

Return-Path: <eckelcu@cisco.com>
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 1CEBD12D641 for <bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 May 2016 14:31:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.947
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.947 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 8IbMx_ZBR_is for <bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 May 2016 14:31:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-3.cisco.com (alln-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.142.90]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9275D12D66E for <bfcpbis@ietf.org>; Tue, 31 May 2016 14:31:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4891; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1464730268; x=1465939868; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=mG+ksKCi6+V6ODBIfRhs4ZtoLj+DKO5HWl2oAGtUZiY=; b=KPBb3u4C6r1OB8mGt8P1EAjfVnoTV4AEpjQyBe6G72ykQ+nmcScU/huF gj5gwzF5bkLKfXVZT7kP2cqClsxtbaaueHzLes9v/WhTfo3SbeGR6N2qP i8CGpEjIgWjIQbpFvhCwH5dvDfAJxdwYs43sNrGKQ0f/GUU+9dJtaE2LH o=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AMCQB6AU5X/4kNJK1bgz1WbgEBDQa6C?= =?us-ascii?q?AENgXoXDYUjSgKBPzgUAQEBAQEBAWUnhEUBAQEEAQEBawsQAgEIEQMBAi8nCx0?= =?us-ascii?q?IAgQBDQWILw6/RgEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARcFinSEQIViBYV2iCeKG?= =?us-ascii?q?gGFf4VlgjuBaYRPh0mBG4YziRgBHgEBQoNtbgGJOH8BAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,397,1459814400"; d="scan'208";a="279385673"
Received: from alln-core-4.cisco.com ([173.36.13.137]) by alln-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 31 May 2016 21:31:07 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-018.cisco.com (xch-aln-018.cisco.com [173.36.7.28]) by alln-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u4VLV7jk029421 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <bfcpbis@ietf.org>; Tue, 31 May 2016 21:31:07 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-018.cisco.com (173.36.7.28) by XCH-ALN-018.cisco.com (173.36.7.28) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Tue, 31 May 2016 16:31:06 -0500
Received: from xch-aln-018.cisco.com ([173.36.7.28]) by XCH-ALN-018.cisco.com ([173.36.7.28]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Tue, 31 May 2016 16:31:06 -0500
From: "Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <eckelcu@cisco.com>
To: "Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <eckelcu@cisco.com>, "Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei)" <gsalguei@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [bfcpbis] WGLC on draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-06
Thread-Index: AQHRhf18DSKK8+o9DUymu+GcytQEaZ90HygAgDQHQwCACQZrAIAirSGA
Date: Tue, 31 May 2016 21:31:06 +0000
Message-ID: <D37331FB.71185%eckelcu@cisco.com>
References: <D3198384.69C68%eckelcu@cisco.com> <D32302D4.6A538%eckelcu@cisco.com> <EEF58659-FBE2-401A-A857-711B9B2CE6AD@cisco.com> <D3563919.6DDF3%eckelcu@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <D3563919.6DDF3%eckelcu@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.6.4.160422
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.24.32.140]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-ID: <D587F74624B6FC4E8161338BF41A0211@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bfcpbis/t4A6cho2UNQ91K_tztYtmAcrlKY>
Cc: "bfcpbis@ietf.org" <bfcpbis@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] WGLC on draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-06
X-BeenThere: bfcpbis@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: BFCPBIS working group discussion list <bfcpbis.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bfcpbis>, <mailto:bfcpbis-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bfcpbis/>
List-Post: <mailto:bfcpbis@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bfcpbis-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bfcpbis>, <mailto:bfcpbis-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 May 2016 21:31:15 -0000

I preparing the document writeup, I came up with a few comments (based on
draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-07):

1) Section 4.1, Sec-WebSocket-Protocol
The example offers indicates the sub protocol as ³bfcp²
The example answer indicates the sub protocol as ³BFCP²
Was this done on purpose to call attention to the field being case
insensitive? Tracing back through RFC 6455 and RFC 2616, I believe this
field is in fact case insensitive, but would it be helpful to clarify that
directly in this draft?

2) Section 6.3, the formatting of this section suffers from the way
references were made. It currently reads as follows:

The SDP attribute 'ws-uri' defined in Section 3.1
   of [Section 3.2 
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-07#ref-I-D.i
etf-bfcpbis-sdp-ws-uri> of [I-D.ietf-bfcpbis-sdp-ws-uri] MUST be used when
BFCP runs on top of WSS">I-D.ietf-bfcpbis-sdp-ws-uri] MUST be used when
BFCP runs on top
   of WS, which in turn runs on top of TCP.  The SDP attribute 'wss-uri'
   defined in Section 3.2 of [Section 3.2
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-07#ref-I-D.i
etf-bfcpbis-sdp-ws-uri> of [I-D.ietf-bfcpbis-sdp-ws-uri] MUST be used when
BFCP runs on top of WSS">I-D.ietf-bfcpbis-sdp-ws-uri] MUST be used
   when BFCP runs on top of WSS, which in turn runs on top of TLS and
   TCP.


I expect this was meant to be as follows:

The SDP attribute 'ws-uri' defined in Section 3.1
   of [I-D.ietf-bfcpbis-sdp-ws-uri] MUST be used when BFCP runs on top
   of WS, which in turn runs on top of TCP.  The SDP attribute 'wss-uri'
   defined in Section 3.2 of [I-D.ietf-bfcpbis-sdp-ws-uri] MUST be used
   when BFCP runs on top of WSS, which in turn runs on top of TLS and
   TCP.


3) Section 7.1 suffers a similar reference formatting issue as section 6.3.

4) Section 12.2, RFC 2818 is indicated as a reference, but it is not
references from within the draft.

Nits
5) ³.² missing at end of first and second paragraphs in section 5 and at
end of first paragraph in section 6.1 and in section 6.2.
6) Section 6.3, s/a new SDP attributes/a new SDP attribute
7) Section 7.1, s/whichcould/which could
8) Section 7.2, s/a endpoint/an endpoint
9) Section 10.2, s/RFC&rfc.number/RFCXXXX (two instances)

Please have a look at these and update the draft accordingly.

Cheers,
Charles



On 5/9/16, 12:58 PM, "bfcpbis on behalf of Charles Eckel (eckelcu)"
<bfcpbis-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of eckelcu@cisco.com> wrote:

>Hi Gonzalo,
>
>Thanks to you and your co-authors. I have move the draft status to waiting
>for document writeup. I will be the document shepherd and prepare the
>writeup.
>
>Cheers,
>Charles
>
>
>On 5/3/16, 12:09 PM, "Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei)" <gsalguei@cisco.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Hi Charles - 
>>
>>The draft has been updated and addresses all WGLC comments received.  It
>>is now ready for publication request.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Gonzalo
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 1, 2016, at 3:07 AM, Charles Eckel (eckelcu) <eckelcu@cisco.com>
>>>wrote:
>>> 
>>> (as chair)
>>> 
>>> WGLC has ended. Thanks again to Paul for his valuable comments. I ask
>>>the authors to please share their thoughts on these and any other
>>>comments they may have received directly, and update the draft
>>>accordingly.
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Charles
>>> 
>>> From: bfcpbis <bfcpbis-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Charles Eckel
>>><eckelcu@cisco.com>
>>> Date: Thursday, March 24, 2016 at 11:46 AM
>>> To: "bfcpbis@ietf.org" <bfcpbis@ietf.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] WGLC on draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-06
>>> 
>>>> Thanks to Paul for having already reviewed and provided comments.
>>>> Everyone else, please do likewise by the March 28 deadline.
>>>> 
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Charles
>>>> 
>>>> From: bfcpbis <bfcpbis-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Charles Eckel
>>>><eckelcu@cisco.com>
>>>> Date: Sunday, March 13, 2016 at 9:55 AM
>>>> To: "bfcpbis@ietf.org" <bfcpbis@ietf.org>
>>>> Subject: [bfcpbis] WGLC on draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-06
>>>> 
>>>>> This is to announce a 2 week WGLC on the draft:
>>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-06
>>>>> 
>>>>> Please review and provide any comments by Monday, March 28, 2016.
>>>>> Comments should be sent to the authors and the BFCPBIS WG list.
>>>>> If you review the draft but do not have any comments, please send a
>>>>>note to that effect as well.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Charles
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> bfcpbis mailing list
>>> bfcpbis@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bfcpbis
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>bfcpbis mailing list
>bfcpbis@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bfcpbis