Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc4960-errata-06
Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> Mon, 04 June 2018 11:06 UTC
Return-Path: <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69240126D85 for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Jun 2018 04:06:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.311
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.311 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ericsson.com
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 Ukpr_-bGJ5c4 for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Jun 2018 04:06:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sessmg22.ericsson.net (sessmg22.ericsson.net [193.180.251.58]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8FBB2126CD6 for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Jun 2018 04:06:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=ericsson.com; s=mailgw201801; c=relaxed/simple; q=dns/txt; i=@ericsson.com; t=1528110385; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:CC:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=eUxwdljwaIPIp0A8yQKuOI/zsEYkkwP+cqeb7UMfNJo=; b=bn0MPimhShbWSX7rZOn8+Dxg/v3gndhaf2aBkYApGM2xiu4muxnIwtNC9Q8T/67/ lt9+Djz6r71LGTMFrcJi+9Kxy85oQaWscbaH0LtCgs2lO9Bem5uF8jYeezKVIlYC VKxQ9gvJTuEBWoEF67IJinI/YHcpgRDBlV+mA3fqIbk=;
X-AuditID: c1b4fb3a-f47ff70000005fee-77-5b151d30b24b
Received: from ESESSHC004.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.183.30]) by sessmg22.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 2D.06.24558.03D151B5; Mon, 4 Jun 2018 13:06:25 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ESESBMB502.ericsson.se (153.88.183.169) by ESESSHC004.ericsson.se (153.88.183.30) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.382.0; Mon, 4 Jun 2018 13:06:24 +0200
Received: from ESESBMB503.ericsson.se (153.88.183.170) by ESESBMB502.ericsson.se (153.88.183.169) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1466.3; Mon, 4 Jun 2018 13:06:24 +0200
Received: from ESESBMB503.ericsson.se ([153.88.183.186]) by ESESBMB503.ericsson.se ([153.88.183.186]) with mapi id 15.01.1466.003; Mon, 4 Jun 2018 13:06:24 +0200
From: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>, Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>, "draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc4960-errata.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc4960-errata.all@ietf.org>
CC: General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc4960-errata-06
Thread-Index: AQHT+20VCXScMZOQGUSoqbUJNb8GL6RP5E+AgAAAqoD//9JvAIAAPScAgAAOtAA=
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2018 11:06:24 +0000
Message-ID: <D73AF870.30D78%christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
References: <9c54eccb-82f2-e135-39af-6bf32824b648@alum.mit.edu> <D73AC219.30C7F%christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> <D73ADF2B.30D2E%christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> <21073937-e22d-2b13-ffc2-aec9e14fd3bb@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <D73AE907.30D50%christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <D73AE907.30D50%christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.7.7.170905
x-originating-ip: [153.88.183.157]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <B7B3803666904843BF21569CDC0A82F7@ericsson.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFrrMIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM2K7nK6hrGi0waMpzBb73r5nsrj66jOL xeu22YwWKzYcYHVg8fj7/gOTR8/nF0weS5b8ZApgjuKySUnNySxLLdK3S+DKmHXwCFPBOruK posiDYwPbLoYOTkkBEwkNrVdYOxi5OIQEjjCKHH75WwmCGczo8St/RNZQaqEBL4ySsz97Q6R WMoocfjrUbYuRg4ONgELie5/2iBxEYGXjBJ3N5wHa2AW0Jc48mc3E4gtLBAu8alvLwuILSIQ IfF/xmp2CNtP4uScG2wgNouAisTt6R1gNbwC1hJ3LoIsBlnWyySxvPMbWBGngI3Ewh1vwGxG ATGJ76fWMEEsE5e49WQ+E8Q/AhJL9pxnhrBFJV4+/gd2kKiAnsSGE7fZIeJKElt6tzCBPMAs oCmxfpc+xBhrictHIUqYBRQlpnQ/ZIe4R1Di5MwnLJCA0JZoWTyBfQKj1Cwkm2chTJqFZNIs JJNmIZm0gJF1FaNocWpxcW66kZFealFmcnFxfp5eXmrJJkZgVB/c8ttqB+PB546HGAU4GJV4 eCWlRKOFWBPLiitzDzFKcDArifCynxSJFuJNSaysSi3Kjy8qzUktPsQozcGiJM7rlGYRJSSQ nliSmp2aWpBaBJNl4uCUamBc/UKFeY1TULhd3BdVd6t9vUJTXz9fqfjXbGnzpx2KxtHPKyf6 ntVLqJNtUH8tGFQ98Wysf8LD6Qt0ry2LitiiF5/1KvNzorxGm8yCFueqDYVTbod5zO9QCzvx 8tzWebFaX3e9cMv4Hsava737feoX29+HDpxi6E/REfj8aVu83VHXx5dmNyspsRRnJBpqMRcV JwIAA+UTEeYCAAA=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/GK7iZ_glKuxnSnnE8x5MDmMsf5M>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc4960-errata-06
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gen-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2018 11:06:35 -0000
Not a comment on the document, but a question/suggestion: If you want to have a place holder for changes to be done in the bis (which seems to be the main purpose of the errata document), why not create a GitHub repo for the bis, and then document everything as GitHub issues? Then, when you start working on the bis, you can map each issue to a pull request etc. Regards, Christer On 04/06/18 13:13, "Gen-art on behalf of Christer Holmberg" <gen-art-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote: > >Hi Gorry, > >... > >>The information in this document does not update RFC4640 or the Errata >>to that specification. The document is instead provided as input to >>preparation of a new document that is expected to be a standards-track >>replacement for RFC4960. If approved, the replacement document will >>incorporate the updates described here and any other changes needed to >>allow this to progress this specification along the standards track. > >I am ok with the two first sentences. > >But, I don’t think you can make the last sentence. This document cannot >normatively define text for the replacement document, or assume that >everything will be incorporated: the WG will have to agree on what goes >into the replacement document once it has been added to the charter etc, >using normal IETF procedures. > >Regards, > >Christer > > > >>>> >>>> On 03/06/18 21:59, "Gen-art on behalf of Paul Kyzivat" >>>> <gen-art-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> wrote: >>>> >>>>> [[INCOMPLETE, NOT READY TO SEND. PLEASE IGNORE]] >>>>> >>>>> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area >>>>> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by >>>>>the >>>>> IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just like any >>>>>other >>>>> last call comments. For more information, please see the FAQ at >>>>> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. >>>>> >>>>> Document: draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc4960-errata-06 >>>>> Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat >>>>> Review Date: 2018-06-03 >>>>> IETF LC End Date: 2018-06-04 >>>>> IESG Telechat date: ? >>>>> >>>>> Summary: >>>>> >>>>> This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in >>>>>the >>>>> review. >>>>> >>>>> Issues: >>>>> >>>>> Major: 1 >>>>> Minor: 2 >>>>> Nits: 1 >>>>> >>>>> 1) MAJOR: >>>>> >>>>> The format of this document disturbs me. According to the abstract: >>>>> >>>>> ... This >>>>> document provides deltas to RFC4960 and is organized in a time >>>>> ordered way. The issues are listed in the order they were >>>>>brought >>>>> up. Because some text is changed several times the last delta in >>>>>the >>>>> text is the one which should be applied. >>>>> >>>>> This format makes the document hard to deal with. A developer who >>>>>wants >>>>> to implement sctp with some or all of the errata fixes will want to >>>>>work >>>> >from a variant of 4960 that incorporates all of those fixes - a bis. >>>>But >>>>> it isn't clear how this document helps with that. I don't think you >>>>>can >>>>> start with 4960 and simply apply all the deltas sequentially, because >>>>> overlapping changes won't work right. >>>>> >>>>> A developer won't be interested in the order in which errata were >>>>> reported. An actual bis document would be more useful to a developer >>>>> than this format. Is that not being done because doing so would be >>>>>more >>>>> difficult? Or because it isn't yet certain that these are the correct >>>>> fixes? >>>>> >>>>> I think you should give some serious consideration of the most >>>>>suitable >>>>> form for this document, in the context of how it is intended to be >>>>>used. >>>>> >>>>> 2) MINOR (maybe MAJOR): >>>>> >>>>> Discovering where one change is impacted by another change is hard. >>>>> >>>>> I dug into the details of the document to understand how many places >>>>> there are actually overlaps between the changes in multiple sections. >>>>> (It took a lot of work to do this.) I found five of these: >>>>> >>>>> - 3.1 / 3.23 >>>>> - 3.3 / 3.43 >>>>> - 3.5 / 3.10 >>>>> - 3.6 / 3.23 >>>>> - 3.24 / 3.32 >>>>> >>>>> (I don't guarantee that this list is exhaustive.) >>>>> >>>>> Of these, I think only one (3.1/3.23) explicitly indicates the >>>>>conflict, >>>>> and it only indicates it within 3.23. >>>>> >>>>> Most of the changes don't have any conflicts. And some of the >>>>>conflicts >>>>> could be removed by being more precise in indicating the change being >>>>> made. In cases where this isn't possible, the presence of the >>>>>conflict >>>>> should be indicated in each section that has a conflict, with cross >>>>> references. IOW, shift the burden of detecting conflicts from the >>>>>reader >>>>> to the document. >>>>> >>>>> 3) MINOR: >>>>> >>>>> Errata Tracking: Apparently each subsection of section 3 covers one >>>>> erratum. But the errata numbers are not mentioned. Each section ought >>>>>to >>>>> reference the errata number it responds to. >>>>> >>>>> 4) NIT: >>>>> >>>>> In section 3.35 (DSCP Changes) the change to section 10.1 isn't >>>>>properly >>>>> indicated. It shows 'Old text' twice rather than 'Old text' and 'New >>>>> text'. >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Gen-art mailing list >>>>> Gen-art@ietf.org >>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Gen-art mailing list >>>> Gen-art@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art >> >> > >_______________________________________________ >Gen-art mailing list >Gen-art@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-i… Michael Tuexen
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-i… Michael Tuexen
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-i… Christer Holmberg
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-i… Christer Holmberg
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-i… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-i… Gorry Fairhurst
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-i… Michael Tuexen
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-i… Michael Tuexen
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-i… Christer Holmberg
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-i… Alissa Cooper
- [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-i… Christer Holmberg
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-i… Christer Holmberg
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-i… Gorry Fairhurst
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-i… Christer Holmberg
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-i… Christer Holmberg
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-i… Gorry Fairhurst
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-i… Christer Holmberg
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-i… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-i… Paul Kyzivat