[ippm] review of draft-mirsky-ippm-twamp-refl-registered-port-01
Ron Even <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com> Tue, 21 March 2017 16:07 UTC
Return-Path: <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25C50129A99 for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 09:07:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 HCzNmyFf_DHm for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 09:07:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf0-x22c.google.com (mail-lf0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6152C129AC9 for <ippm@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 09:07:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id y193so68878757lfd.3 for <ippm@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 09:07:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=KezDg9e86ymp8oVcqBVWwHhA6/lPJncVOKF+x47KlaI=; b=pN52H7ZETSD3BfEgSDQmHPrQX5ino1XlM7V9mxvlYUmWPIAn+xSnJM2BMMmywKyO5j ELcw9XG0jxRLP93xvUXDikfPZ9XTm9KI61TToyRgndmshpkIyo/9FrnZZ+7CJr9nF+sW FI+fbjxraKL3AiGc2PGnWQAADtFW1EqBEpn1yVSPBsYfVI4O1kOjcst/fcoCdV2WccXs olkunD85z2Py4Xi0hJTfz/gHSOVY1t8rpRMmibZasFyrklheTCgCYKB5sEnTGB12XG6m W8fqm5GrPEUR88J+QxYTQysq4NNde7wydV/HXgQdNKkZyb7uMhRTKXMGapNvytia+ueN 3LzA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=KezDg9e86ymp8oVcqBVWwHhA6/lPJncVOKF+x47KlaI=; b=W+nTOwUW0hFRa0jNFn1LofFtGk9WoXcO+GSytyZf4rV8T+UeTPU7NBqsTUE5v5g8AW 8SdvgSdc0dZLHqvVr1ER7DoToPEF0NgpaaiS5K5dI8W9TEghWLSAm46XBTzrxU0EBLnV qgua9DJVP2oOqrlyde3NbYJXCVYtLSpKOnr+Zjk7VZ+T0ubF9ak8PRPTpHhtKv7r3/VL Y2kSuWzBNtcJRlIBrYYVegZIwOjVVb5uKFINQ7Z/nWhV7EL9fKU7pZp5naDHTNArfIRu KDEYjkk0noIG2Z/T54ggATVaks3awaTnr5jO/dR4xl2nlIwzTemcvd1SHIprBgGv1tyY 8N+Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H0bz6FPPDh/23rvSM9zV9dA0a0pgETAGZoYJS5lJau3HBVCiLs1QRqHZhXaY6w0FIm5zgYx2+HSZhiAZw==
X-Received: by 10.46.77.150 with SMTP id c22mr11659424ljd.114.1490112439275; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 09:07:19 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.25.22.86 with HTTP; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 09:07:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ron Even <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 11:07:18 -0500
Message-ID: <CAHy0fzC52bsph9LeM2GLY-N3TDV-YAvEgJzB-W47h6fXqJi+Cg@mail.gmail.com>
To: ippm@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c1abc029e5c0b054b3fd6ab"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/Fe5ObqhExH60Nc3s-lcwEI_IgDE>
Subject: [ippm] review of draft-mirsky-ippm-twamp-refl-registered-port-01
X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group <ippm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ippm/>
List-Post: <mailto:ippm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 16:07:23 -0000
Hi, I reviewed the document and support the allocation of well known port for the described case. I agree that such port will allow a better deplyoment of TWAMP light Thanks Roni Even