Re: [CCAMP] Opinions please FW: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7139 (3930)

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Mon, 24 March 2014 16:41 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A16E81A0265 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 09:41:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -99.783
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.783 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.347, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.77, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 1d6R9RRDVJkA for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 09:41:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (asmtp5.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.176]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB36B1A0236 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 09:41:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s2OGfb1C026864; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 16:41:37 GMT
Received: from 950129200 (108.26.90.92.rev.sfr.net [92.90.26.108]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s2OGfYWT026820 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 24 Mar 2014 16:41:36 GMT
From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: "'Lou Berger'" <lberger@labn.net>, <ccamp@ietf.org>
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 16:41:35 -0000
Message-ID: <000001cf477f$ed8b45e0$c8a1d1a0$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: Ac9HOz7lDCNM3CjJQwKmlMW8noOFMA==
Content-Language: en-gb
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1576-7.5.0.1017-20588.001
X-TM-AS-Result: No--36.993-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--36.993-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: dL10VBB8yofqEDhqu3HRMGZUc2jtcaSdWnhhdxxhvgAaK6XhXABo97Bn tcsD4nhqu6uC7vrPJR/xTwx4UJIMcjAPG7OdV/f5y18e5+drKgYbTwzYj2zQugzvg1/q1MH2V36 195Ynpa6DL56AAr3NhcowTJnEdgrS9Ej4sD4NWApjHWM8krL4PPZpw431D6ueuCpIOfZrMBeNbn PbsX+DMPr+Vs9b94Cd09pFNyVgDNfh8RW9qY6+G7u9iqQJLR0vIcCiCHZJTldrE1c4mB5Umr2+P t89anuuw8XU8bLzT9LHT71wM3d2eKRJrB+VtLAiatGCGdi/nWrhKQh1LCmGBuQydRUvl3QTID6D MKSDmdhtHxZlSWQbqIOR9bvwFJHCRF8J0whn5t0WFB9s82eM2x83WxJo1IH1u6qThyrnanOy1m1 yYQlZ+VJad0Z5GtPvRdAlp93HnNy77rpLLmM7AkKcYi5Qw/RV+LidURF+DB36y+W27nfBXNqS7v +0q636k/7JXJ5e1BH61KFBKVmuVC2PQJ73d0XSnVTWWiNp+v9BldmDYjwlpudTjSOFC/vqo8WMk QWv6iV95l0nVeyiuEIhOWyY9/MAC24oEZ6SpSk+Mqg+CyrtwA==
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/gNTUT1NrYaW-PdyFoOyJU3IcgVw
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Opinions please FW: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7139 (3930)
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <ccamp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ccamp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 16:41:42 -0000

OK, if you think it is stylistic, I can let it go.
I read the original text as saying 
     [RFC7096]
    does not provide the means to signal all the new Signal Types
which is completely true, but also irrelevant because that RFC does not provide
the means to signal *any* signal types.

While we have this cupboard door open: any thoughts on my conversation with
Fatai on his report on the IANA section of 7139?

A

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lou Berger [mailto:lberger@labn.net]
> Sent: 24 March 2014 00:35
> To: adrian@olddog.co.uk; ccamp@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Opinions please FW: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7139
> (3930)
> 
> Adrian,
>     I have to say that I really think you are making a pure language
> style point.  I personally would not have phrased the original text the
> way it was written, but I try very hard in document reviews to avoid
> pure stylistic changes.  -- In short, I think authors/editors should
> have stylistic latitude, and generally defer to the RFC editor to make
> any required stylistic changes. Of course, this latitude does not extend
> to technical errors or imprecision.  Unless I'm misreading your change,
> I think it is a purely stylistic revision and I'd recommend rejecting it
> as an Editorial errata.
> 
> Of course, had you made this comment before publication I would have
> supported a change (although I would have tweaked the specific language
> slightly.)
> 
> Lou
> 
> PS I think making a habit of discussing errata before verification is a
> good one, no matter who submits the issue.
> 
> On 3/23/2014 6:09 PM, Adrian Farrel wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Before I get into the habit of raising and verifying errata reports myself,
> > could some of you look at this and check that I am right.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Adrian
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: RFC Errata System [mailto:rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org]
> >> Sent: 23 March 2014 22:04
> >> To: zhangfatai@huawei.com; zhangguoying@mail.ritt.com.cn;
> >> sergio.belotti@alcatel-lucent.it; daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com;
> >> kpithewan@infinera.com; akatlas@gmail.com; adrian@olddog.co.uk;
> >> lberger@labn.net; dbrungard@att.com
> >> Cc: adrian@olddog.co.uk; ccamp@ietf.org; rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
> >> Subject: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7139 (3930)
> >>
> >> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7139,
> >> "GMPLS Signaling Extensions for Control of Evolving G.709 Optical Transport
> >> Networks".
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------
> >> You may review the report below and at:
> >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=7139&eid=3930
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------
> >> Type: Editorial
> >> Reported by: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
> >>
> >> Section: 3
> >>
> >> Original Text
> >> -------------
> >>    [RFC4328] describes GMPLS signaling extensions to support the control
> >>    for the 2001 revision of the G.709 specification.  However, [RFC7096]
> >>    does not provide the means to signal all the new Signal Types and
> >>    related mapping and multiplexing functionalities.  Moreover, it
> >>    supports only the deprecated auto-MSI (Multiframe Structure
> >>    Identifier) mode, which assumes that the Tributary Port Number (TPN)
> >>    is automatically assigned in the transmit direction and not checked
> >>    in the receive direction.
> >>
> >>
> >> Corrected Text
> >> --------------
> >>    [RFC4328] describes GMPLS signaling extensions to support the control
> >>    for the 2001 revision of the G.709 specification.  However, as
> >>    described in[RFC7096], that document does not provide the means to
> >>    signal all the new Signal Types and related mapping and multiplexing
> >>    functionalities.  Moreover, it supports only the deprecated auto-MSI
> >>    (Multiframe Structure Identifier) mode, which assumes that the
> >>    Tributary Port Number (TPN) is automatically assigned in the transmit
> >>    direction and not checked in the receive direction.
> >>
> >>
> >> Notes
> >> -----
> >> RFC 7096 is the analysis of pre-existing GMPLS signalling. It does not
contain
> > any
> >> protocol extensions itself, but looks at the mechanisms provided in RFC
4328.
> >>
> >> Instructions:
> >> -------------
> >> This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
> >> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
> >> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG)
> >> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------
> >> RFC7139 (draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12)
> >> --------------------------------------
> >> Title               : GMPLS Signaling Extensions for Control of Evolving
G.709
> > Optical
> >> Transport Networks
> >> Publication Date    : March 2014
> >> Author(s)           : F. Zhang, Ed., G. Zhang, S. Belotti, D. Ceccarelli,
K.
> > Pithewan
> >> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> >> Source              : Common Control and Measurement Plane
> >> Area                : Routing
> >> Stream              : IETF
> >> Verifying Party     : IESG
> > _______________________________________________
> > CCAMP mailing list
> > CCAMP@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp
> >