IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <acm@research.att.com> Wed, 18 April 2018 16:29 UTC

Return-Path: <acm@research.att.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 2528412D870; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 09:29:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 P0Ko75bV694Z; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 09:29:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.140]) (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 1B18412D864; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 09:29:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0049287.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049287.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.21/8.16.0.21) with SMTP id w3IGRTh9012809; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 12:29:38 -0400
Received: from tlpd255.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (sbcsmtp3.sbc.com [144.160.112.28]) by m0049287.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2he8dya9e3-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 18 Apr 2018 12:29:38 -0400
Received: from enaf.dadc.sbc.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tlpd255.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w3IGTW3E090798; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 11:29:32 -0500
Received: from zlp30493.vci.att.com (zlp30493.vci.att.com [135.46.181.176]) by tlpd255.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w3IGTQ2t090655; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 11:29:26 -0500
Received: from zlp30493.vci.att.com (zlp30493.vci.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by zlp30493.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id C8E8A4000492; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:29:26 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from tlpd252.dadc.sbc.com (unknown [135.31.184.157]) by zlp30493.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id AAEA640004A6; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:29:26 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from dadc.sbc.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tlpd252.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w3IGTQXR100374; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 11:29:26 -0500
Received: from mail-green.research.att.com (mail-green.research.att.com [135.207.255.15]) by tlpd252.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w3IGTJar100202; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 11:29:19 -0500
Received: from exchange.research.att.com (njbdcas1.research.att.com [135.197.255.61]) by mail-green.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4FE1E1511; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 12:28:56 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from njmtexg5.research.att.com ([fe80::b09c:ff13:4487:78b6]) by njbdcas1.research.att.com ([fe80::8c6b:4b77:618f:9a01%11]) with mapi id 14.03.0389.001; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 12:29:18 -0400
From: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <acm@research.att.com>
To: Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>, "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>
CC: "draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-yang.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-yang.all@ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, "ippm@ietf.org" <ippm@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [ippm] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-yang-07
Thread-Index: AQHT1ZxG6b+s1nE9REmoY8p+X2zgiKQGtsIA
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:29:15 +0000
Message-ID: <4D7F4AD313D3FC43A053B309F97543CF4A8EA557@njmtexg5.research.att.com>
References: <152389450589.19717.5878253699822119266@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <152389450589.19717.5878253699822119266@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [135.16.251.237]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2018-04-18_03:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=618 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1711220000 definitions=main-1804180148
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/MIzF5yKT1cD8EMNBW2_9LVhIaUw>
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 16:29:57 -0000

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email