[Gen-art] Re: REVIEW: draft-ietf-avt-rfc2833bisdata-06.txt

"Michael A. Patton" <MAP@MAP-NE.com> Thu, 08 June 2006 03:36 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FoBKH-0004mw-BP; Wed, 07 Jun 2006 23:36:53 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FoBKF-0004mm-Vi for gen-art@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2006 23:36:51 -0400
Received: from outside.tutakai.map-ne.com ([69.25.196.14] helo=Mail.MAP-NE.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FoBKE-0008ES-Np for gen-art@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2006 23:36:51 -0400
Received: by Mail.MAP-NE.com (Postfix, from userid 105) id 69B413F74E; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 23:36:50 -0400 (EDT)
To: taylor@nortel.com
In-reply-to: <44844C8C.3000505@nortel.com> (taylor@nortel.com)
From: "Michael A. Patton" <MAP@MAP-NE.com>
References: <20060524120311.D00913F749@Mail.MAP-NE.com> <44844C8C.3000505@nortel.com>
Message-Id: <20060608033650.69B413F74E@Mail.MAP-NE.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 23:36:50 -0400
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 8b30eb7682a596edff707698f4a80f7d
Cc: fluffy@cisco.com, magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com, gen-art@ietf.org, schulzrinne@cs.columbia.edu
Subject: [Gen-art] Re: REVIEW: draft-ietf-avt-rfc2833bisdata-06.txt
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/gen-art>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: gen-art-bounces@ietf.org

   Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 11:23:56 -0400
   From: "Tom-PT Taylor" <taylor@nortel.com>

   Michael A. Patton wrote:
   > I note in the table in 2.7.1 there's no allowance for some
   > combinations, which I know I've used in the past and have equipment in
   > my home to generate, specifically B103 at 110.  It may just be that
   > none of these combinations are actually in use any more (I certainly
   > don't use them, I just collect 1970's era computer equipment :-), but
   > are you really sure?  Wouldn't it make sense to just define a complete
   > orthogonal set?  To the best of my knowledge both B103 and V21 were
   > used at both 110 and 300 in full duplex applications, and as far as I
   > know may still be at some location.
   > 
   [PTT] The combinations shown in the document are those mentioned in Rec. 
   V.18 for text telephony. This is the primary target of the indicators, 
   so I don't think the others are required. One can always use the general 
   data indicator VBDGen.

OK, that makes sense and it's perfectly fine to delegate that to ISO.
Since all the other things were just "Done", I won't comment on them
here.

In re-reading the document, I did notice some trivial things.
Actually, they're all RFC Editor things and can easily wait for AUTH48
if nothing else comes up...

The header shows "Updates: xxxx"  If there's actually an RFC being
updated, then shouldn't you already know the number?

The RFC editor note in the abstract mentions changing the first
normative reference.  But the first normative reference is to RFC2119
which clearly doesn't need any update...you obviously meant [5] not
[1].

I also note that there is still one reference to "RFC xxxx" that
doesn't have a "[5]" (not the one I saw last time, you fixed that one,
I just got inspired to use emacs' "Occurs" feature and noticed one
other one).

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art