IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [bfcpbis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4583bis-04.txt

"Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <eckelcu@cisco.com> Wed, 26 December 2012 23:16 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 5EE1821F8C98 for <bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:16:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w5ZoWFXI40Db for <bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:16:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.86.76]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B18D21F8CCC for <bfcpbis@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:16:23 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2923; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1356563783; x=1357773383; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=JKhEP3nZvygnvSSz4S+LQ08ugppM/918/1JwvW/lC7Q=; b=Wpzm6zrDuaAvHpOlVXk3MMloCQ1EXUW2z1r4qTS/QHHSKe4iv7yZhi3i kwCSd8OLBQNZphLgWP8+CKnSS+4hUfzNvg6LjKTqv1K3QFTISqhLRoJVa CT5rrfWvxh4CkdTAQYsajNEFbYAaYRKSeWs9uxYJo7zP2U6wvswkTp0EG 8=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAFABiE21CtJXG9/2dsb2JhbABFvWEWc4IeAQEBBAEBATc0CwwEAgEIEQQBAQEKFAkHJwsUCQgCBAENBQiICwy1SwSMV4NiYQOmVIJ0giI
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,359,1355097600"; d="scan'208";a="156700776"
Received: from rcdn-core2-2.cisco.com ([173.37.113.189]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 26 Dec 2012 23:16:23 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x04.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x04.cisco.com [173.36.12.78]) by rcdn-core2-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qBQNGNJe029677 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 26 Dec 2012 23:16:23 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x08.cisco.com ([169.254.3.169]) by xhc-aln-x04.cisco.com ([173.36.12.78]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Wed, 26 Dec 2012 17:16:22 -0600
From: "Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <eckelcu@cisco.com>
To: "Tom Kristensen (tomkrist)" <tomkrist@cisco.com>, "bfcpbis@ietf.org" <bfcpbis@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [bfcpbis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4583bis-04.txt
Thread-Index: AQHN3evETyMskEE++UyMy56MMMS4e5gghrcAgAAoHqCACxB/cA==
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 23:16:21 +0000
Message-ID: <92B7E61ADAC1BB4F941F943788C08828046F2270@xmb-aln-x08.cisco.com>
References: <20121219132126.31139.66098.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <50D1C4C6.7000501@cisco.com> <92B7E61ADAC1BB4F941F943788C08828046EED65@xmb-aln-x08.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <92B7E61ADAC1BB4F941F943788C08828046EED65@xmb-aln-x08.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.21.85.51]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: 'Tom Kristensen' <2mkristensen@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4583bis-04.txt
X-BeenThere: bfcpbis@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 23:16:24 -0000

The changes look good to me. I do have the following editorial suggestions:

1) Section 3
r/transport field explained below/transport field, as explained below
r/of transport used/of the transport used
r/ TCP is used as transport/ TCP is used as the transport
r/ UDP is used as transport/ UDP is used as the transport

2 Section 7
r/ use TCP or UDP as underlying transport/ use TCP or UDP as the underlying transport

Cheers,
Charles

> -----Original Message-----
> From: bfcpbis-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:bfcpbis-bounces@ietf.org] On
> Behalf Of Charles Eckel (eckelcu)
> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 2:08 PM
> To: Tom Kristensen (tomkrist); bfcpbis@ietf.org
> Cc: 'Tom Kristensen'
> Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4583bis-04.txt
> 
> Everyone who submitted WGLC comments, please confirm this version
> addresses all your comments satisfactorily.
> Everyone else, please review the entire draft carefully and share any
> comment or concerns you have.
> Thanks to Tom for incorporating all the feedback and posting this update.
> 
> Happy Holidays!
> Charles
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: bfcpbis-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:bfcpbis-bounces@ietf.org] On
> > Behalf Of Tom Kristensen (tomkrist)
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 5:45 AM
> > To: bfcpbis@ietf.org
> > Cc: 'Tom Kristensen'
> > Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4583bis-04.txt
> >
> > On 12/19/2012 02:21 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           : Session Description Protocol (SDP) Format for Binary
> > Floor Control Protocol (BFCP) Streams
> > > 	Author(s)       : Gonzalo Camarillo
> > >                            Tom Kristensen
> > > 	Filename        : draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4583bis-04.txt
> > > 	Pages           : 15
> > > 	Date            : 2012-12-19
> > >
> >
> > Changes from -03:
> > - Fixed according to Camarillo's input and comments on list 2012-10-24
> > - Use UDP/TLS/BFCP not UDP/DTLS/BFCP in the example.
> > - Added normative reference to RFC 5763, Section 5 also in
> >    Section 8 Authentication.
> > - Resolved issue with different way to pick (D)TLS initiator for TCP and
> >    UDP, adding informational note.
> >
> >
> > To my knowledge, in this draft version all the issues from WGLC and
> > after are answered and fixed if appropriate.
> >
> >
> > -- Tom
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email