Re: [L2tpext] draft-ietf-l2tpext-tdm-05
Alexander Vainshtein <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com> Mon, 04 August 2008 15:06 UTC
Return-Path: <l2tpext-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: l2tpext-archive-1@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-l2tpext-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7484F28C2E2; Mon, 4 Aug 2008 08:06:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: l2tpext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: l2tpext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4FC33A6A8D for <l2tpext@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Aug 2008 06:23:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.474
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.474 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.125, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 RcJheptzxuJg for <l2tpext@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Aug 2008 06:23:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eci-iron1.ecitele.com (eci-iron1.ecitele.com [147.234.242.117]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8627D3A63D3 for <l2tpext@ietf.org>; Sun, 3 Aug 2008 06:23:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from unknown (HELO ILPTAM01.ecitele.com) ([147.234.244.44]) by eci-iron1.ecitele.com with ESMTP; 03 Aug 2008 16:31:39 +0300
Received: from ilptexch01.ecitele.com ([172.31.244.40]) by ILPTAM01.ecitele.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sun, 3 Aug 2008 16:23:54 +0300
Received: from ILPTMAIL02.ecitele.com ([147.234.244.212]) by ilptexch01.ecitele.com ([172.31.244.40]) with mapi; Sun, 3 Aug 2008 16:23:53 +0300
From: Alexander Vainshtein <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com>
To: Ignacio Goyret <igoyret@alcatel-lucent.com>
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 16:23:53 +0300
Thread-Topic: draft-ietf-l2tpext-tdm-05
Thread-Index: Acj0CcwblR1VbDEBSY+UZFvzYScWBwBYgXGA
Message-ID: <A3C5DF08D38B6049839A6F553B331C7680265CEA76@ILPTMAIL02.ecitele.com>
References: <200808011905.m71J5x7h001725@cliff.eng.ascend.com>
In-Reply-To: <200808011905.m71J5x7h001725@cliff.eng.ascend.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Aug 2008 13:23:54.0371 (UTC) FILETIME=[2D33ED30:01C8F56C]
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 08:06:26 -0700
Cc: "l2tpext@ietf.org" <l2tpext@ietf.org>, "sharon@rawflow.com" <sharon@rawflow.com>
Subject: Re: [L2tpext] draft-ietf-l2tpext-tdm-05
X-BeenThere: l2tpext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Layer Two Tunneling Protocol Extensions <l2tpext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2tpext>, <mailto:l2tpext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/l2tpext>
List-Post: <mailto:l2tpext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:l2tpext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2tpext>, <mailto:l2tpext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: l2tpext-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2tpext-bounces@ietf.org
Ignacio, Lots of thanks for a very detailed review. I agree with you that the document is ready for the WG LC, since most of the comments are editorial and can be done after the LC. I would appreciate your advice regarding split of the IANA Considerations section. Regards, Sasha > -----Original Message----- > From: Ignacio Goyret [mailto:igoyret@alcatel-lucent.com] > Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 10:00 PM > To: Alexander Vainshtein > Cc: l2tpext@ietf.org > Subject: draft-ietf-l2tpext-tdm-05 > > Hi Sasha, > This last rev has been a big improvement. Thanks for your work! > > I have just a few more editorial changes: > > * Section 2, last paragraph (page 3) > > OLD: There are two new AVPs for the Session Connection Messages. > ^^^^^^^^^^ ^ > NEW: There are two new AVPs for the Session Management messages. > ^^^^^^^^^^ ^ > > * Section 2.1, page 4: > > OLD: > a) The specified value MUST be an integer multiple of > number of DS0 channels in the corresponding attachment > circuit. > NEW: > a) The specified value MUST be an integer multiple of the > ^^^ > number of DS0 channels in the corresponding attachment > circuit. > > * Section 2.2, page 5: > OLD: PT is the payload type expected in the RTP header. > Value of zero > ^ > NEW: PT is the payload type expected in the RTP header. A > value of zero > ^^^ > > * Section 3, 2nd bullet point under "CESoPSN basic" (page 7): > > s/teh/the/ > > * IANA Considerations: > Just to make it clear to everyone involved, you may want to separate > the lonely return code from the list of return/error codes and make > two lists: a return code list (one item) and an error code > list (with > the 5 items). > > The text looks reasonably solid to me, so I believe we are ready > for WGLC. > > Thanks again for the effort that you have put into this work. > > Cheers, > -Ignacio > > _______________________________________________ L2tpext mailing list L2tpext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2tpext
- [L2tpext] draft-ietf-l2tpext-tdm-05 Ignacio Goyret
- Re: [L2tpext] draft-ietf-l2tpext-tdm-05 Alexander Vainshtein
- Re: [L2tpext] draft-ietf-l2tpext-tdm-05 Ignacio Goyret
- Re: [L2tpext] draft-ietf-l2tpext-tdm-05 Alexander Vainshtein