Re: [Gen-art] [ippm] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-yang-07

Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com> Wed, 18 April 2018 17:04 UTC

Return-Path: <presnick@qti.qualcomm.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 B257B12D777; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 10:04:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.301
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.301 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] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=qti.qualcomm.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 dJMTwpFLMd4N; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 10:04:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alexa-out.qualcomm.com (alexa-out.qualcomm.com [129.46.98.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D7A171275AB; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 10:03:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=qti.qualcomm.com; i=@qti.qualcomm.com; q=dns/txt; s=qcdkim; t=1524071040; x=1555607040; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: references:mime-version; bh=ToI/jyC4HHhFv4B4wxEJ39t3VoeY2bQE/fWFFrePjss=; b=RiVAmpTVNw02GAkm3HieppXX0JypykTvhfLB5P1/GDkcfqoP5ovfGrKY Y4tSD+a2hZkLr+P9jnbrYLQEBU89v7ybJUujxGIO5vxq9Zm/xukcRYFx8 +7FhWmTmLxuakrquLqxH5m7uGwbA9y5Jq2vLs2qwmhz0LtDXFrCST/nIU k=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.48,466,1517904000"; d="scan'208";a="16705172"
Received: from ironmsg02-sd.qualcomm.com ([10.53.140.142]) by alexa-out.qualcomm.com with ESMTP; 18 Apr 2018 10:03:59 -0700
Received: from nasanexm01f.na.qualcomm.com ([10.85.0.32]) by ironmsg02-sd.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 18 Apr 2018 10:03:59 -0700
Received: from [10.38.242.146] (10.80.80.8) by NASANEXM01F.na.qualcomm.com (10.85.0.32) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1365.1; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 10:03:58 -0700
From: Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
To: "MORTON, ALFRED C" <acm@research.att.com>
CC: gen-art@ietf.org, draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-yang.all@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, ippm@ietf.org
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 12:03:56 -0500
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.11.1r5471)
Message-ID: <47EF6766-75F9-4178-BE0E-D8E396F8730A@qti.qualcomm.com>
In-Reply-To: <4D7F4AD313D3FC43A053B309F97543CF4A8EA557@njmtexg5.research.att.com>
References: <152389450589.19717.5878253699822119266@ietfa.amsl.com> <4D7F4AD313D3FC43A053B309F97543CF4A8EA557@njmtexg5.research.att.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"
X-Originating-IP: [10.80.80.8]
X-ClientProxiedBy: NASANEXM01B.na.qualcomm.com (10.85.0.82) To NASANEXM01F.na.qualcomm.com (10.85.0.32)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/IwtbpTpzQG0TnapERrzBVuM7wzI>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] [ippm] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-yang-07
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: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 17:04:02 -0000

I am fine with that, but good idea to check with others who actually 
have to implement the document. :-)

Thanks for taking care of this.

pr

On 18 Apr 2018, at 11:29, MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) wrote:

> Hi Pete, for your Minor Issue:
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ippm [mailto:ippm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Pete Resnick
>> Sent: Monday, April 16, 2018 12:02 PM
> ...
>> Minor issues:
>>
>> In the paragraph after Figure 3, it says, "and subsequent values are
>> monotonically increasing". I'm not sure I understand what that means. 
>> If 0 is
>> the highest priority, then 1 is a *lower* priority than 0, not an 
>> increasing
>> priority. If you are trying to say that the numeric value of the 
>> priority field
>> is increasing by 1 for each subsequent value, then "monotonically 
>> increasing"
>> is wrong; the sequence "0 2 5 36" is monotonically increasing. You'd 
>> say
>> instead, "and subsequent values increase by one". If all you mean is 
>> that
>> values start at 0 and go up from there, I think you should just 
>> delete the
>> entire phrase; it doesn't add anything and strikes me as confusing.
>>
> [acm] I seem to recollect that we arrived at this sentence after
> explaining the inverse relationship between values and priorities 
> along the way.
> Surely, someone has done this before, and co-authors welcome other
> concise text suggestions.
>
> OLD
>    The client container holds a list (mode-preference-chain) which
>    specifies the Mode values according to their preferred order of use
>    by the operator of this Control-Client, including the 
> authentication
>    and encryption Modes.  Specifically, mode-preference-chain lists 
> the
>    mode and its corresponding priority, expressed as a 16-bit unsigned
>    integer, where zero is the highest priority and subsequent values 
> are
>    monotonically increasing.
>
> NEW
>    The client container holds a list (mode-preference-chain) which
>    specifies the Mode values according to their preferred order of use
>    by the operator of this Control-Client, including the 
> authentication
>    and encryption Modes.  Specifically, mode-preference-chain lists 
> the
>    mode and its corresponding priority, expressed as a 16-bit unsigned
>    integer, where zero is the highest priority and subsequent integers
>    increase by one.
>
> Does that do it?
> Al