[bfcpbis] draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4582bis-15
"Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com> Tue, 20 October 2015 09:45 UTC
Return-Path: <paulej@packetizer.com>
X-Original-To: bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 204161B3136 for <bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 02:45:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_57=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_64=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 S9umUi3k6UtW for <bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 02:45:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C38E1B3132 for <bfcpbis@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 02:45:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.61.220.161] ([173.38.220.59]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id t9K9jqBe029505 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <bfcpbis@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 05:45:54 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1445334354; bh=5/TbxGYpNIgYFv3jMWkuY4xM0wPZjF1g6URJzN/Q5Q0=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:Reply-To; b=RKiBns//lsyzlbv4+mZMZvxKQBdtIjiQxnSmM4Ks19/VUcqomVc0Hy8PgLhi9isgp RwQmM4prtM39DNXfPmidasrTBHNN15ntLlf46Om9T9+752ti2eliIPYG3aEJlQfokg goFjhurpq+1iSccTBfiu9Yv8aV/bTyljyhTl9vJ0=
From: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
To: "bfcpbis@ietf.org" <bfcpbis@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 09:45:57 +0000
Message-Id: <emba60df91-e131-42b6-bc8b-80ae0eb547d9@helsinki>
User-Agent: eM_Client/6.0.23421.0
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------=_MBC30BC4F3-2A1B-47D8-B683-B551A7333495"
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.12 (dublin.packetizer.com [10.109.150.103]); Tue, 20 Oct 2015 05:45:54 -0400 (EDT)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bfcpbis/uhkP-Q8nLv4rh6q8S_xFS17NV2Y>
Subject: [bfcpbis] draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4582bis-15
X-BeenThere: bfcpbis@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
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, 20 Oct 2015 09:45:57 -0000
Folks, A new revision of draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4582bis (-15) was published just a few days ago. This is a summary of what was changed Several editorial changes to clarify the text, making "should" a "SHOULD", "REQUIRD" to "required", "SHALL" to "MUST", etc. based on feedback sent to the list, DISCUSS comments, etc.Corrected a few places where the wrong message was referenced (copy/paste errors)Put parentheses around the message size calculation in 6.2.3 for clarityEnhanced the examples in Appendix A to explicitly show the "R" value to add clarityRemoved "This User ID will be used by the floor control server to authenticate and authorize the request." in several places in the text, since the User ID neither authenticates nor authorizes.Clarified text in 5.1 regarding unsupported messagesRemoved superfluous text "At this point" in several placesAdded a note about predictable conference identifiers to warn against such useAdded language to encourage discarding message if fragment lengths are not rightAdjusted the T1 and T2 timers to implement RFC 2988 (TCP retransmission timer calculation)Removed text suggesting to use ICMP messages to control behavior, as those are subject to off-path attacksClarified text in B.1.1.6 to present it in a historical contextExplain that "Hello" is more than just for liveness checks (for unreliable transports, at least)Correct error in 6.2.3 that said fragment offset length was in bytes (should be "4-octet units")Explain that if timer T1 expires, that means the connection is broken.Changed text in 9.1 to make it clear that the protocol is not restricted to self-signed certificatesRemoved redundant language in 13.7Defined "transaction failure window"Made it clearer that the fragment offset / fragment length word is never present when using a reliable transportNote, that said: what really guides presence is the "F" bit, but the point is these fields should not be there if the transport is reliableMade clarifying changes to the IANA section (since most is already registered)Changed the ABNF syntax to remove unnecessary parentheses Hopefully, that's everything. Many small changes, but I think that addresses all of the outstanding comments. I did notice a missing period at the end of section 5.1. If we're only down to that, I believe the text is ready to go. :) Paul
- [bfcpbis] draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4582bis-15 Paul E. Jones
- Re: [bfcpbis] draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4582bis-15 Charles Eckel (eckelcu)