Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode

[Leeyoung <[e-mail]>]

Hi Lou,

Please see inline for my comments. Here's working version draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode-14 and the idnits results. 

Let me know if this is ready to publish.

Thanks.
Young

-----Original Message-----
From: Lou Berger [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 4:35 PM
To: Leeyoung; CCAMP; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode

Young,


On 1/27/2014 8:04 PM, Leeyoung wrote:
> Hi Lou,
> 
> All missing references are added. 
> 
> Yes, the "second 32 bit field is referring to "Additional fields as necessary per action" field shown on page 14."
> 
> Old: The second 32 bit field is a part of the base label used as a starting point in many of the specific formats.
> New: The second 32 bit field (which is referred to by "Additional fields as necessary per action" in the below encoding) is a part of the base label used in many of the specific formats.

Well, this still isn't clear as the packet diagram doesn't show a 32 bit field, it shows a variable length one.  How about:
OLD
  The second 32 bit field (which is referred to by "Additional fields
   as necessary per action" in the below encoding) is a part of the
   base label used in many of the specific formats.
 and
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |      Additional fields as necessary per action                |
     |                                                               |

NEW
   Action specific fields are defined below.
 and
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                   (Action specific fields)                    |
     |                            ....                               |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

YOUNG>> This is fine with me. Accepted. 


Also, just noticed:
2.2.3. LABEL_RANGE1

What does the 1 indicate in the name?

YOUNG>> Deleted "1". 

Much thanks,
Lou

> 
> Attached is a working version of draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode-14.txt. 
> 
> Let me know if this is ready to publish.
> 
> Regards,
> Young
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lou Berger [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 1:53 PM
> To: Leeyoung; CCAMP; 
> [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - 
> draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode
> 
> Young, (all),
> 
> You have two idnit issues:
>   == Missing Reference: 'RWA-INFO' is mentioned on line 198, but not defined
>   == Missing Reference: 'RFC 6205' is mentioned on line 779, but not 
> defined
> 
> I have just one question on this one:
> 
>> - section 2.2.
>>    Labels are variable in lengh and need not be 4 bytes long.  This
>>    needs to be represented and accounted for in the encodings defined
>>    in this section.
>>
>> YOUNG>> Agreed. Added the following sentence in Section 2.6 (new section due to shuffling):
>>    "Labels are variable in length. The second 32 bit field is a part of the base label used as a
>>    starting point in many of the specific formats."
>>
> 
> I don't understand what you mean by the "second 32 bit field" are you referring to the " Additional fields as necessary per action" field shown on page 14?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Lou
>