Re: [tram] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-tram-stunbis-16

[[e-mail] (Dale R. Worley)]

Marc Petit-Huguenin <[e-mail]> writes:
> I did some research and you were right, starting from the left side is
> more common.  My main counter-example is in fact in STUN itself as
> figure 3:
>
>                        0                 1
>                        2  3  4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
>                       +--+--+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>                       |M |M |M|M|M|C|M|M|M|C|M|M|M|M|
>                       |11|10|9|8|7|1|6|5|4|0|3|2|1|0|
>                       +--+--+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
[...]

That's an interesting complication.  As you've noted, it's nearly
universal for IETF documents to use big-endian numbering.

But the above example is paradoxical, as the bits are numbered in a
big-endian way across the top of the diagram, from 2 to 15, while being
numbered in a littl-endian way is the boxes, from 11 to 0.  I had
noticed that the top numbers didn't start at 0 (so I didn't count this
figure in my "8 out of 10"), but I overlooked the numbers in the boxes.

Dale