Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bis-09.txt
Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> Thu, 12 July 2012 21:02 UTC
Return-Path: <bclaise@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: dime@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dime@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5409111E80EF for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 14:02:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.397
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.397 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.201, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rH-sm1g30e5F for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 14:02:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from av-tac-bru.cisco.com (weird-brew.cisco.com [144.254.15.118]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07B5111E80CF for <dime@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 14:02:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-TACSUNS: Virus Scanned
Received: from strange-brew.cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by av-tac-bru.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q6CL3Qde011034; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 23:03:26 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [10.60.67.85] (ams-bclaise-8914.cisco.com [10.60.67.85]) by strange-brew.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q6CL3O8o023129; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 23:03:24 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <4FFF3B9D.4040905@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 23:03:25 +0200
From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Glen Zorn <glenzorn@gmail.com>
References: <4FFC405F.9030508@cisco.com> <15719_1341962331_4FFCB85B_15719_4173_1_6B7134B31289DC4FAF731D844122B36E027152@PEXCVZYM13.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <4FFD2694.2040704@cisco.com> <1342002286.14913.56.camel@gwz-laptop>
In-Reply-To: <1342002286.14913.56.camel@gwz-laptop>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------060506010204010306020804"
Cc: dime@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bis-09.txt
X-BeenThere: dime@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Diameter Maintanence and Extentions Working Group <dime.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dime>, <mailto:dime-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dime>
List-Post: <mailto:dime@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dime-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime>, <mailto:dime-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 21:02:55 -0000
On 11/07/2012 12:24, Glen Zorn wrote: > 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. Agreed on the principle, except that, in this case, we speak about an "*", which could mean something specific for this document: optional, a reference to something else, etc... Regards, Benoit. > 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 >> DiME@ietf.org <mailto:DiME@ietf.org> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime > > > > _______________________________________________ > DiME mailing list > DiME@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime
- [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bis-09… Benoit Claise
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… lionel.morand
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… Benoit Claise
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… dieter.jacobsohn
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… lionel.morand
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… Benoit Claise
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… Benoit Claise
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… Glen Zorn
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… Glen Zorn
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… Glen Zorn
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… lionel.morand
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… Glen Zorn
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… Benoit Claise
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… Benoit Claise
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… Glen Zorn
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… Glen Zorn
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… Glen Zorn
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… lionel.morand
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… lionel.morand
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… Benoit Claise
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… Benoit Claise
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… Glen Zorn
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… Benoit Claise
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… Glen Zorn
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… Glen Zorn
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… Glen Zorn
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… Benoit Claise
- Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bi… Benoit Claise