Re: [ippm] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ippm-delay-var-as-01

Al Morton <acmorton@att.com> Thu, 08 January 2009 14:05 UTC

Return-Path: <ippm-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ippm-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ippm-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAC2F28C166; Thu, 8 Jan 2009 06:05:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1408B28C14D; Thu, 8 Jan 2009 06:05:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.692
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.692 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.104, BAYES_00=-2.599, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER=0.803, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id K2Eq1DQuWL6v; Thu, 8 Jan 2009 06:05:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail120.messagelabs.com (mail120.messagelabs.com [216.82.250.83]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FA0F28C105; Thu, 8 Jan 2009 06:05:08 -0800 (PST)
X-VirusChecked: Checked
X-Env-Sender: acmorton@att.com
X-Msg-Ref: server-10.tower-120.messagelabs.com!1231423494!14866726!1
X-StarScan-Version: 6.0.0; banners=-,-,-
X-Originating-IP: [144.160.128.141]
Received: (qmail 27864 invoked from network); 8 Jan 2009 14:04:54 -0000
Received: from sbcsmtp9.sbc.com (HELO flph161.enaf.ffdc.sbc.com) (144.160.128.141) by server-10.tower-120.messagelabs.com with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 8 Jan 2009 14:04:54 -0000
Received: from enaf.ffdc.sbc.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by flph161.enaf.ffdc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n08E4sOw018924; Thu, 8 Jan 2009 06:04:54 -0800
Received: from klph001.kcdc.att.com (klph001.kcdc.att.com [135.188.3.11]) by flph161.enaf.ffdc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n08E4npO018860; Thu, 8 Jan 2009 06:04:49 -0800
Received: from kcdc.att.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by klph001.kcdc.att.com (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id n08E4nER002691; Thu, 8 Jan 2009 08:04:49 -0600
Received: from maillennium.att.com (mailgw1.maillennium.att.com [135.25.114.99]) by klph001.kcdc.att.com (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id n08E4kYC002656; Thu, 8 Jan 2009 08:04:46 -0600
Message-Id: <200901081404.n08E4kYC002656@klph001.kcdc.att.com>
Received: from acmt.att.com (dyp004273dys.mt.att.com[135.16.251.248](misconfigured sender)) by maillennium.att.com (mailgw1) with SMTP id <20090108140446gw1000u6uje>; Thu, 8 Jan 2009 14:04:46 +0000
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2009 09:04:45 -0500
To: Christian Vogt <christian.vogt@ericsson.com>, Gen-ART Mailing List <gen-art@ietf.org>
From: Al Morton <acmorton@att.com>
In-Reply-To: <E48259B7-9A7D-4F36-AA92-B8CEDD4B95A6@ericsson.com>
References: <E48259B7-9A7D-4F36-AA92-B8CEDD4B95A6@ericsson.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Cc: bclaise@cisco.com, ippm@ietf.org, ippm-chairs@tools.ietf.org, ippm-ads@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [ippm] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ippm-delay-var-as-01
X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group <ippm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/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>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Sender: ippm-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ippm-bounces@ietf.org

Christian,

Thanks for your (very kind) review.  We'll take care of the
two nits you identified in the next version.

Al and Benoit

At 01:38 AM 1/8/2009, Christian Vogt wrote:
>I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
>reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
>http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
>
>Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
>or AD before posting a new version of the draft.
>
>
>Document..........:  draft-ietf-ippm-delay-var-as-01
>Reviewer..........:  Christian Vogt
>Review date.......:  Jan. 7, 2009
>IESG Telechat date:  Jan. 8, 2009
>
>
>Summary:  This draft is ready for publication as Informational RFC.
>
>
>This document compares two widely used metrics for measuring packet
>delay variations, and it provides guidance with respect to when to use
>which of the metrics.
>
>I found the document clearly ready for publication.  It is very
>informative and easy to read.  The comparison and guidelines provided by
>the document are relevant given the resemblance of the observed metrics
>and the variety of use cases to which the metrics potentially apply.
>Furthermore, the document includes an excellent motivation and survey of
>related work; this renders it useful for readers of different levels of
>expertise in the field of performance measuring.  Also, the document is
>perfectly embedded into existing work through a large number of
>well-placed references.
>
>Two nits, which should be fixed prior to publication, are the following:
>
>- Section 1.1, 3rd paragraph:  "Lost and delayed packets are separated
>   by a waiting time threshold." -- Since the waiting time threshold
>   does not only apply to those packets that are lost or delayed, this
>   sentence should be rephrased to:  "Packets for which one-way loss or
>   delay is measured are...".
>
>- Section 3.2, 4th-to-last paragraph:  "The error in the alignment
>   process can be accounted for by a factor, A." -- A is an offset
>   (addend) here, not a factor.
>
>Best regards,
>- Christian
>

_______________________________________________
ippm mailing list
ippm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm