IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-ccamp-assoc-info-03

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Mon, 14 May 2012 19:44 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
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 3BD0221F8767 for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 May 2012 12:44:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.52
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.52 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.079, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 oef4b8Gku1yP for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 May 2012 12:44:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (asmtp2.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.249]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F209A21F866E for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 May 2012 12:44:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q4EJiL9c016076; Mon, 14 May 2012 20:44:21 +0100
Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q4EJiJrE016060 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 14 May 2012 20:44:20 +0100
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: 'Ben Campbell' <ben@nostrum.com>, draft-ietf-ccamp-assoc-info.all@tools.ietf.org
References: <6D18CD1E-FBB8-43F7-8D82-46667AA2075B@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <6D18CD1E-FBB8-43F7-8D82-46667AA2075B@nostrum.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 20:44:19 +0100
Message-ID: <02d501cd3209$f4e1ddf0$dea599d0$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQKPYG+EoWR2PH09lv7vuPvRHMMBhZVFUdNQ
Content-Language: en-gb
Cc: gen-art@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-ccamp-assoc-info-03
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 14 May 2012 19:44:24 -0000

Thanks Ben.

All entered as RFC Editor notes except the last one...


> -- 2.2, paragraph 5: "... definition of the Association ID, which is (quoting
> [RFC4872]):"
> 
> The quoted text this refers to is more of a description of use than a
definition.

I agree, but don't think any change is needed. The full text here is...

   They
   also share the same definition of the Association ID, which is
   (quoting [RFC4872]):

      "The Association ID MUST be set to the LSP ID of the LSP being
      protected by this LSP or the LSP protecting this LSP.  If unknown,
      this value is set to its own signaled LSP ID value (default).
      Also, the value of the Association ID MAY change during the
      lifetime of the LSP."

Thus "which is" means "and here is a description".

If you feel really strongly we can probably work something out. 

A

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email