Re: [Gen-art] [netext] Gen-ART LC review: draft-ietf-netext-update-notifications-07
"Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)" <sgundave@cisco.com> Thu, 26 September 2013 04:28 UTC
Return-Path: <sgundave@cisco.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 CF05211E8140; Wed, 25 Sep 2013 21:28:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 di0Dz0P27AUU; Wed, 25 Sep 2013 21:28:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E507B11E8136; Wed, 25 Sep 2013 21:28:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3214; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1380169709; x=1381379309; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=kOlvU+v6mcwAUThsyzMSGhAIEcTXE7u+2lRv2lt8VSo=; b=KRHv+7KY1ojY8TE2kpZIHMYLwuT5HIhgFyi9HT5zCzQCc3KoIOObD/rc h6iYctYQWFIk8UMAPHViRjRDaGsTi8q1ywIe5vnDO7nNzAtBSplsA01Pm lHBcS0FIvXDMLUJ503yYGuhEoda7TP0kLeek5snKB8WTSL7juVmQH0tZ7 0=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgMFAHG3Q1KtJXG//2dsb2JhbABbgwc4UsBdgSMWdIIlAQEBBDo9AhIBCA4GBAoUQiUCBAENBQiHfgy8T48gMQeDHYEBA5QfhQyQSIMkgio
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.90,982,1371081600"; d="scan'208";a="264599731"
Received: from rcdn-core2-4.cisco.com ([173.37.113.191]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP; 26 Sep 2013 04:28:28 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x11.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x11.cisco.com [173.36.12.85]) by rcdn-core2-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r8Q4SSwj017692 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 26 Sep 2013 04:28:28 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x03.cisco.com ([169.254.6.174]) by xhc-aln-x11.cisco.com ([173.36.12.85]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Wed, 25 Sep 2013 23:28:27 -0500
From: "Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)" <sgundave@cisco.com>
To: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>, Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>
Thread-Topic: [netext] Gen-ART LC review: draft-ietf-netext-update-notifications-07
Thread-Index: AQHOunDYtakOjXNb8EKqID0dYvvK9A==
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 04:28:26 +0000
Message-ID: <24C0F3E22276D9438D6F366EB89FAEA811732F11@xmb-aln-x03.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <5241D27E.4040201@nostrum.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.3.120616
x-originating-ip: [10.32.246.213]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <415FCA18BFDD7E4A8855647E3E99A724@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "netext@ietf.org" <netext@ietf.org>, General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-netext-update-notifications@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-netext-update-notifications@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] [netext] Gen-ART LC review: draft-ietf-netext-update-notifications-07
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <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: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 04:28:34 -0000
Hi Robert, We seem to have missed this change. Will fix it in the next rev. Regards Sri On 9/24/13 10:57 AM, "Robert Sparks" <rjsparks@nostrum.com> wrote: >Hi Suresh - > >It doesn't look like any of these changes made it into -08? > >RjS > >On 8/22/13 4:51 PM, Robert Sparks wrote: >> On 8/22/13 4:06 PM, Suresh Krishnan wrote: >>> Hi Robert, >>> Thanks a lot for the review. We will include the changes in the next >>> revision we submit. Please see proposed changes inline. >>> >>> On 08/22/2013 02:05 PM, Robert Sparks wrote: >>>> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on >>>> Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at >>>> >>>> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. >>>> >>>> Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments >>>> you may receive. >>>> >>>> Document: draft-ietf-netext-update-notifications-07 >>>> Reviewer: Robert Sparks >>>> Review Date: 2013-08-22 >>>> IETF LC End Date: 2013-08-29 >>>> IESG Telechat date: not scheduled >>>> >>>> Summary: This draft is ready for publication as Proposed Standard >>>> >>>> I had to read through this text several times to convince myself >>>> implementers could figure out what order they were required to take >>>> steps in vs where they had flexibility: >>>> >>>> o Upon accepting the Update Notification message, the mobile >>>> access >>>> gateway MUST process the message and perform the actions >>>> based on >>>> the Notification Reason. >>>> * If the (A) flag in the message is set to a value of (1), the >>>> mobile access gateway MUST first send an Update Notification >>>> Acknowledgement message and set the status code field >>>> according >>>> to the result of processing the Update Notification message. >>>> >>>> In particular, it's not immediately obvious if there is tension >>>>between >>>> that "MUST first" and having "the result of processing" available. >>>> Please consider rewording to make it clearer that this "result of >>>> processing" is not intended to include waiting for the result of some >>>> action processing this notification message might trigger. >>> I think we can lose the word first without losing anything. Does the >>> following rewording work for you? >> Yes, thanks! >>> >>> OLD: >>> If the (A) flag in the message is set to a value of (1), the mobile >>> access gateway MUST first send an Update Notification Acknowledgement >>> message and set the status code field according to the result of >>> processing the Update Notification message. >>> >>> NEW: >>> If the (A) flag in the message is set to a value of (1), the mobile >>> access gateway MUST send an Update Notification Acknowledgement message >>> with the status code field set based on the result of processing the >>> Update Notification message. >>> >>>> It might help readers understand the intended usual case >>>>retransmission >>>> mechanics if the expected default values listed in section 7 were >>>> called >>>> out earlier in the document. >>> Sure. Will call out the defaults at first use. >>> >>> Thanks >>> Suresh >>> >> >
- [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review: draft-ietf-netext-up… Robert Sparks
- Re: [Gen-art] [netext] Gen-ART LC review: draft-i… Suresh Krishnan
- Re: [Gen-art] [netext] Gen-ART LC review: draft-i… Robert Sparks
- Re: [Gen-art] [netext] Gen-ART LC review: draft-i… Robert Sparks
- [Gen-art] Gen-art telechat review: draft-ietf-net… Robert Sparks
- Re: [Gen-art] [netext] Gen-ART LC review: draft-i… Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)
- Re: [Gen-art] [netext] Gen-ART LC review: draft-i… Suresh Krishnan
- Re: [Gen-art] [netext] Gen-ART LC review: draft-i… Jari Arkko