Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bis-09.txt

[Glen Zorn <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 09:09 +0200, Benoit Claise wrote:
> Hi Lionel,
> 
> > Hi Benoit,
> >  
> > - I could not find the meaning of * in, for example,
> >  
> >                           [ CHAP-Auth ]
> >                           [ CHAP-Challenge ]
> >                         * [ Framed-Compression ]
> >                           [ Framed-Interface-Id ]
> >                           [ Framed-IP-Address ]
> >                         * [ Framed-IPv6-Prefix ]
> >                           [ Framed-IP-Netmask ]
> >                           [ Framed-MTU ]
> >                           [ Framed-Protocol ]
> >                           [ ARAP-Password ]
> >                           [ ARAP-Security ]
> >                         * [ ARAP-Security-Data ]
> >                         * [ Login-IP-Host ]
> >                         * [ Login-IPv6-Host ]
> >                           [ Login-LAT-Group ]
> >                           [ Login-LAT-Node ]
> >                           [ Login-LAT-Port ]
> >                           [ Login-LAT-Service ]
> >                         * [ Tunneling ]
> >                         * [ Proxy-Info ]
> >                         * [ Route-Record ]
> >                         * [ AVP ]
> > [[LM]] the « * » in front the AVP means that 0, 1 or more AVP scan be present in the request (or in a Grouped AVP). It follows rules used in RFC3588 and defined in RFC 5234 (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5234#section-3.6).
> >  
> 
> BC> Thanks for the education.
> Is this so obvious to the Diameter readers, including the newcomers,
> that we don't need to mention it?
> In other words, am I the only one NOT knowing this? ;-)


Hmm.  draft-ietf-dime-rfc3588bis is listed as  a normative reference in
4005bis and RFC 5238 is listed as a normative reference in
draft-ietf-dime-rfc3588bis.  My understanding is that one cannot expect
to read and understand an RFC without having read and understood the
normative references thereof.  Is my understanding correct?  If so, then
there is in fact no need to mention it since any reader cognizant of
that requirement will already know (or could easily refresh the memory
of) what the notation means.


> 
> Regards, Benoit.
> 
> 
> > Regards,
> >  
> > Lionel
> > 
> > _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
> > 
> > Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
> > pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
> > a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
> > France Telecom - Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
> > 
> > This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
> > they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> > If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
> > As emails may be altered, France Telecom - Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
> > Thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DiME mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime