[bmwg] Re: Last call on draft-ietf-bmwg-dsmterm-09
Al Morton <acmorton@att.com> Wed, 21 April 2004 02:39 UTC
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA17118 for <bmwg-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 22:39:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BG7al-0006ec-Tf; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 22:36:03 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BG7RR-0002PT-B9 for bmwg@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 22:26:25 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA16479 for <bmwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 22:26:21 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BG7RO-0004Oc-0c for bmwg@ietf.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 22:26:22 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BG7QS-0004LE-00 for bmwg@ietf.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 22:25:25 -0400
Received: from almso2.att.com ([192.128.166.71] helo=almso2.proxy.att.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BG7QI-0004Hd-00 for bmwg@ietf.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 22:25:14 -0400
Received: from attrh0i.attrh.att.com ([135.37.94.54]) by almso2.proxy.att.com (AT&T IPNS/MSO-5.0) with ESMTP id i3L2Ojop005367 for <bmwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 22:24:45 -0400
Received: from custsla.mt.att.com (135.21.14.109) by attrh0i.attrh.att.com (6.5.032) id 40703259002AC35A; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 22:20:33 -0400
Received: from acmortonw.att.com ([135.210.105.95]) by custsla.mt.att.com (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id i3L2cnL12630; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 22:38:49 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <6.0.3.0.0.20040420221725.02996810@custsla.mt.att.com>
X-Sender: acm@custsla.mt.att.com (Unverified)
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.0.3.0
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 22:24:41 -0400
To: bmwg@ietf.org
From: Al Morton <acmorton@att.com>
Cc: Kevin Dubray <kdubray@juniper.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: [bmwg] Re: Last call on draft-ietf-bmwg-dsmterm-09
Sender: bmwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: bmwg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: bmwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg>, <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Benchmarking Methodology Working Group <bmwg.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:bmwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg>, <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
BMWG, The WG Last Call on dsmterm-09 concluded with two comments: 1. The capacity-term comment has been addressed in the current version. 2. Development of the corresponding methodology document reveals that there may be new terms that need definition, and existing terms that could be deleted if they are not used in the methodology. This is a manageable risk inherent in the process to agree first on terms, then methods. Any new terms needed could be defined in an Appendix and moved to the terminology memo as an update. At the same time, orphan terms could be removed (but these pose less of a problem). It is worth noting that, although the editors have a well-studied view of the methodology topic, the methods that achieve WG consensus are likely to evolve during the comment process. All indications point to very active discussions of methodology on the list. At this time, we ask that the 09 draft be revised and re-submitted to fix the following editorial issues: - There are two complete versions of the draft text in the 09 file. - The dates, though incorrect, indicate that the draft expires in April. - There are a number of deviations from the I-D nits requirements. Kevin has complied a summary of nit-fixes to get the editing started (see below). More editing will likely be needed, so please reconcile the formatting carefully with http://www.ietf.org/ID-nits.html This last point is a word-to-the-wise for *all BMWG editors* When the revised version of the draft is submitted, there will be another short WG Last Call to be sure that no technical issues have emerged. Kevin/Al BMWG WG Co-Chairs o Nits section 1.1, formating. dsmterm needs to be spellchecked. E.g., "mulitcast" for multicast; "out-sequence" for out-of-sequence. Many instances that contrast the "No hyphenation for line-breaks" mandate. Several instances that don't conform to the "ASCII-only, no control characters (other than CR, NL & FF) edicts. E.g., "packetsÆ", "ôMean Jitterö", or "ômean ipdvö". Plain ASCII is all that's allowed. o Nits section 1.2, required sections all IDs. dsmterm needs to have it's boilerplate updated to one of the standard ones per http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-guidelines.txt. (It's off slightly.) Copyright Notice should be revised to reflect current year. o Nits section 2, content issues. dsmterm most likely will get called on its use of keywords like MUST, SHALL, etc, by the RFC 2119 reviewers. This is most likely due to the fact that 2119 was written in the context of a standards track documents. (See: http://www.rfc-editor.org/policy.html#policy.2119ref ) To better reflect the usage of these keywords in informational benchmarks, I have made suggestions in the past that editors consider wording that disclaims the benchmark as standards track effort and reaffirms the context in which the keywords are needed. See section 2 of http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-bmwg-mcastm-14.txt for an example. _______________________________________________ bmwg mailing list bmwg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg