Re: [ippm] draft-cmzrjp-ippm-twamp-yang
Gregory Mirsky <gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com> Mon, 22 February 2016 17:21 UTC
Return-Path: <gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA0E71B3817 for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Feb 2016 09:21:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.093
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.093 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, LOCALPART_IN_SUBJECT=1.107, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
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 CACcbQJY-lZ0 for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Feb 2016 09:21:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from usplmg21.ericsson.net (usplmg21.ericsson.net [198.24.6.65]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 66AEF1B381C for <ippm@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Feb 2016 09:21:50 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: c6180641-f799c6d000007d66-6d-56cb439328ed
Received: from EUSAAHC003.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.81]) by usplmg21.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id FA.9B.32102.3934BC65; Mon, 22 Feb 2016 18:21:23 +0100 (CET)
Received: from EUSAAMB103.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.120]) by EUSAAHC003.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.81]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Mon, 22 Feb 2016 12:21:49 -0500
From: Gregory Mirsky <gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com>
To: "draft-cmzrjp-ippm-twamp-yang@tools.ietf.org" <draft-cmzrjp-ippm-twamp-yang@tools.ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: draft-cmzrjp-ippm-twamp-yang
Thread-Index: AdFqbLsNtCaeQhkcSNaNNzLViFP6yQDKKviw
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 17:21:48 +0000
Message-ID: <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF112219DD0CE@eusaamb103.ericsson.se>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.10]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF112219DD0CEeusaamb103erics_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrBLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyuXRPoO5k59NhBie3W1vsX3iVxaLnwTtm ByaPJUt+Mnl8ufyZLYApissmJTUnsyy1SN8ugSvjzZ0PrAW39Cp+b85pYLyv0cXIySEhYCLx 8u9mJghbTOLCvfVsXYxcHEICRxglnvx7wwrhLGeU+PJ6FStIFZuAkcSLjT3sILaIQKLEzsmL wWxmAWWJva/mM4LYwgJaEpemfGSEqNGWOLzyBHMXIweQbSRxdBcXSJhFQFViScN/sBJeAV+J s32HWEBsRqAjvp9awwQxUlzi1pP5UMcJSCzZc54ZwhaVePn4HyuErSQxaek5VpDxzAL5EgcW +0CMFJQ4OfMJywRG4VlIJs1CqJqFpAqiREdiwe5PbBC2tsSyha+ZYewzBx4zIYsvYGRfxchR WlyQk5tuZLiJERgfxyTYHHcw7u31PMQowMGoxMNrwHkqTIg1say4MvcQowQHs5IIb53U6TAh 3pTEyqrUovz4otKc1OJDjNIcLErivHOd14cJCaQnlqRmp6YWpBbBZJk4OKUaGBUU7KbstH/5 oP11hsTKJ9lSy37a/1YWWDK9efefr6Xfa9T0/dRldndXXT/i3+4z5YH+gZgzi350h20V8L2V 9+DdWlPpe7M+Trl/saxtqsK5fcb7fywJS2oIEJ1n8GSt4ZG1hUV3orT+fY8NXDvRatftPxOu hMasn5GkEGozv0H80G/p62fefz6ixFKckWioxVxUnAgA6fLR9YsCAAA=
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/G33a6FItnXPQnu1I0DREfU99h08>
Cc: "ippm@ietf.org" <ippm@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [ippm] draft-cmzrjp-ippm-twamp-yang
X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 17:21:57 -0000
Dear Authors, et. al,
please consider this comment as part of WG adoption call discussion.
Regards,
Greg
From: Gregory Mirsky
Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 8:59 AM
To: 'draft-cmzrjp-ippm-twamp-yang@tools.ietf.org'
Cc: ippm@ietf.org
Subject: draft-cmzrjp-ippm-twamp-yang
Dear Authors,
I've noticed that detailed data model examples in Appendix A use UDP port numbers from the registered range of UDP port numbers. The registered range is administered by IANA and port numbers should not be used for applications other than it was registered to. I believe that UDP port numbers for TWAMP test must be used from dynamic, private range of port numbers 49152-65535. Use of port numbers described in RFC 6335 in details.
What do you think?
Regards,
Greg
- [ippm] draft-cmzrjp-ippm-twamp-yang Gregory Mirsky
- Re: [ippm] draft-cmzrjp-ippm-twamp-yang Gregory Mirsky
- Re: [ippm] draft-cmzrjp-ippm-twamp-yang Reshad Rahman (rrahman)
- Re: [ippm] draft-cmzrjp-ippm-twamp-yang Gregory Mirsky
- [ippm] draft-cmzrjp-ippm-twamp-yang Srivathsa Sarangapani
- Re: [ippm] draft-cmzrjp-ippm-twamp-yang MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)
- Re: [ippm] draft-cmzrjp-ippm-twamp-yang MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)
- Re: [ippm] draft-cmzrjp-ippm-twamp-yang Srivathsa Sarangapani