Re: [CCAMP] [CCAMP WG] #50: Identification of hexadecimal representation in G.709 vs decimal in GMPLS

[Lou Berger <[e-mail]>]

Julien,
	I think you win on this one.

Authors,
	Please add a '0x' prefix to any hexadecimal value in the draft.  In
other words:
  s/=2/=0x2
  s/ 20/ 0x20
  s/ 21/ 0x21

Lou

On 5/13/2013 12:33 PM, Julien Meuric wrote:
> Hi.
> 
> On my right, a simple prefix that makes values clear and unambiguous at 
> reading time, without the burden of references' context; on my left, 2 
> confusing statements that will no more be in mind when reading figures...
> I have often heard comments about RFC readability and the needed IETF 
> background to understand what is not explicit: 2 more characters per 
> figure would be both helpful and harmless.
> 
> By the way, the IANA registry about GMPLS makes use of the '0x' prefix: 
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/gmpls-sig-parameters/gmpls-sig-parameters.xml#gmpls-sig-parameters-8
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Julien
> 
> 
> On 05/13/2013 12:59, Lou Berger wrote:
>>>> 13.  Identification of hexadecimal representation in G.709 vs decimal in
>>>>      GMPLS considerations
>>>>
>>>>    Encoding in GMPLS foresses the utilization of hexadecimal values
>>>>    format "0x" while in the data plane documents, like G.709
>>>>    reccomendation, the format usually used is the decimal one (e.g.
>>>>    G-PID in RSVP-TE vs Payload Type in G.709).
>>>>
>> Assuming we go this way: I understand your intent, but I think you're
>> actually stating exactly the opposite.  How about, simply:
>>
>>    Note that the Payload Types (PT) defined in [G709-2012], and repeated
>>    in this document, are provided in hexadecimal representation without
>>    the commonly used '0x' prefix.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>