Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-ccamp-additional-signal-type-g709v3-02 and call for sheperd

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Wed, 20 January 2016 10:16 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 164491B39B8 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 02:16:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
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 BhE6TimNeW_I for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 02:16:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (asmtp3.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.159]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BCB761B39BD for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 02:16:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u0KAG9gF008254; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 10:16:09 GMT
Received: from 950129200 (255.56-78-194.adsl-static.isp.belgacom.be [194.78.56.255]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u0KAG72Y008245 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 20 Jan 2016 10:16:08 GMT
From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: "'Fatai Zhang'" <zhangfatai@huawei.com>, "'Daniele Ceccarelli'" <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>, "'CCAMP'" <ccamp@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 10:16:05 -0000
Message-ID: <031701d1536b$9303c940$b90b5bc0$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0318_01D1536B.9307C0E0"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AdFTayP8XnH1vxxMRdWh9CNIdXpy0g==
Content-Language: en-gb
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1679-8.0.0.1202-22076.006
X-TM-AS-Result: No--16.441-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--16.441-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: Xxz90/Ib/ZhbJCKOm3VRCZC5cUkRGjKlPQlKJ9DUxnlE+XrXgWG2WoGz up3QMMFlia9Q2pMjM0+Vjmqvt/p8coN12XKYbuJLXjbObVmL4wlIeBRUygi/YTeN6XEp4FxwsSW ZW0eF2vblbaN88L5QJ+YAh37ZsBDC1kqyrcMalqU4PPb1XDCZIVN4+W/gDVHWTGcP5NqJXx9hjZ VjbJ+2B6MhXbS+aCTjcFEiuPxHjsW6hgVvSdGKozASEdbkpUDPVEgEe2cy9YQgfgnqxlBKuc/PC mgLkWHoORupHZrb260ER9Ta+6BEXWpiq4KsutXC31GU/N5W5BB9VWFMmxnSYp/CZFZiRlCtGYff kVXgB2hwyAmzxb7Z01Ep96PnqFJs0HjeANoeuJ34JyR+b5tvoJHbyMTbnMu/Ijfg8TZmuIgjQq8 6+6LxdRFyIYZe6FcSu72KpAktHS+Vq+okl1rYDzDJ9a3KikGoWKtyhKFtvjJhwkdWPOgiJeW+U5 oHsj+FXvtPCejx1LP6YdEve7M6IqFiPo/lDWJLyWCL+8tLbvbTho2VKhloxICm0p2UmIaiwbUPQ vgaX7qcW/yNFy4iXbxygpRxo469C4rWEiK1IgcifM7JMNHW64VFXipBZ10aw3bPkz7m9vJrtgfn BAuSMzblc6Gei4nld7yMwO18iIghBdUXaqx1XbXcdpVx4xdSIvwdoLo6xB8wehHQpjQxlVWxAz9 Ls6I18kwXqnKVk1ZUXvI6K7iraSBW9lXcEHZA0ToSvkRVqOZbYToDRWMGWpDQiv0Qe0IxWe1mDH wEam40RLN0QcxzujbN0t/c2qF2CjCjLqEWJ+ybKItl61J/yZUdXE/WGn0FfeZdJ1Xsorh7EN+WL fYASACA6qeyxLhRU1KZM+CwdiE07nrXlOsRu7D4nw+LakpSEPym6WRGpFw=
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/rR8uGGMwNFf6V2-X2-xkkVj-wrQ>
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-ccamp-additional-signal-type-g709v3-02 and call for sheperd
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 10:16:36 -0000

I would say "yes", but Deborah is now cc'ed.
 
Adrian
--
Celebrate the New Year by buying someone you love a book.
Tales from the Wood - Eighteen new fairy tales
http://www.feedaread.com/books/Tales-from-the-Wood-9781786100924.aspx
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Tales-Wood-Adrian-Farrel/dp/1786100924
Or buy from me direct.
 
 
 
From: Fatai Zhang [mailto:zhangfatai@huawei.com] 
Sent: 20 January 2016 06:19
To: adrian@olddog.co.uk; 'Daniele Ceccarelli'; 'CCAMP'
Subject: RE: [CCAMP] WG Last Call on
draft-ietf-ccamp-additional-signal-type-g709v3-02 and call for sheperd
 
Hi Adrian,
 
Thanks for your review.
 
I just have one question to confirm my understanding. 
 
We know that G.sup43 is a non-normative recommendation defined by ITU-T SG15, is
it valid to define a "Standards Track" RFC for G.sup43?
 
 
 
 
 
Best Regards
 
Fatai
 
From: CCAMP [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel
Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2016 1:46 AM
To: 'Daniele Ceccarelli'; 'CCAMP'
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call on
draft-ietf-ccamp-additional-signal-type-g709v3-02 and call for sheperd
 
Thanks Daniele.
 
It would be nice as a general principle to have the document nit-free before
last call, but anyway, the authors can handle that as part of the last call
comments and make the necessary fixes before the I-D goes forward. Maybe the
same applies to the formatting, page breaks and so on?
 
I reviewed and commented on this document some time back and it appears to be
much better now. Thanks to the authors.
 
Here are some nits...
 
The Abstract is full of abbreviations that will need to be expanded.
 
The text uses the term "draft" to describe itself. If you change this to be
"document" it will remain consistent when the I-D becomes an RFC.
 
It would be nice if the IANA considerations section gave IANA a little more
help. Specifically...
IANA maintains a registry called "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS) Signaling Parameters" with a subregistry called "OTN Signal Type". IANA
is requested to make three further allocations from that registry as follows.
You might also give IANA guidance about which numbers to allocate as they will
want to know whether to use the unassigned values in the 12-19 range or values
in the 23-255 range. They will also wonder about 5.
 
I don't see how G.sup43 can be other than a normative reference. It looks to me
from http://www.itu.int/itu-t/recommendations/rec.aspx?rec=11321 that the
revision you reference is actually in force (i.e., not "for agreement").
 
And lastly (I'm sure we've had this discussion before) the registry is marked
with the Registration Procedure "Standards Action" yet this document is marked
as "Informational". That will mean that IANA will (should) refuse to assign the
code points.
 
Cheers,
Adrian
 
 
 
From: CCAMP [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Daniele Ceccarelli
Sent: 19 January 2016 10:47
To: CCAMP (ccamp@ietf.org)
Subject: [CCAMP] WG Last Call on
draft-ietf-ccamp-additional-signal-type-g709v3-02 and call for sheperd
 
Working group,
 
Thanks to the prompt reply from the authors we're ready to start the WG last for
this document. 
 
This starts a two weeks working group last call on
draft-ietf-ccamp-additional-signal-type-g709v3-02.
The last call ends on Tuesday  February 2nd. 
Please send your comments to the CCAMP mailing list.
 
All the IPR declarations from authors and contributors have been collected and
can be found in the history of the document: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ccamp-additional-signal-type-g709v3/
history/ 
Please note that no IPR was disclosed against this draft.
 
If anyone is willing to be the shepherd of the document, please volunteer.
 
Thanks
Daniele & Fatai