Re: [manet] ordered data items in DLEP pause extension

Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Tue, 12 June 2018 21:52 UTC

Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
X-Original-To: manet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: manet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AB26130EBC for <manet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 14:52:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (768-bit key) header.d=labn.net
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 IQDE5SdEEa0F for <manet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 14:52:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from outbound-ss-809.bluehost.com (outbound-ss-809.bluehost.com [69.89.23.87]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CF20124BE5 for <manet@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 14:52:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cmgw13.unifiedlayer.com (unknown [10.9.0.13]) by gproxy1.mail.unifiedlayer.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F123A175B97 for <manet@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 15:52:53 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]) by cmsmtp with ESMTP id SrD7fbZX9Lr3zSrD7fphuq; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 15:52:17 -0600
X-Authority-Reason: nr=8
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version :Date:Message-ID:Cc:From:References:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=o24awWBnGZe3bcDJlBh6G1QXnnlvPDQzgPD+EXEdO+Y=; b=wAILeoBtcedvVTtZ6F0+tOYjb8 CeJreHMy5K5i/wh4XMNvJJv4G2UK76uM+yoDkFlLOkFF3qdkGKToO4rmUFORMROOGzfmMe+ODbtWv SdiMvnSRXNFCdd16tQktXjTLJ;
Received: from pool-100-15-86-101.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([100.15.86.101]:41848 helo=[IPv6:::1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89_1) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1fSrDX-000rlS-RJ; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 15:52:43 -0600
To: manet <manet@ietf.org>, "manet-chairs@ietf.org" <manet-chairs@ietf.org>
References: <E67FED6C-9582-4F05-B680-6C105649617A@ll.mit.edu>
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
Message-ID: <b72f5ce3-efdb-6202-2d74-60f7551a3310@labn.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 17:52:42 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <E67FED6C-9582-4F05-B680-6C105649617A@ll.mit.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box313.bluehost.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - labn.net
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source-IP: 100.15.86.101
X-Source-L: No
X-Exim-ID: 1fSrDX-000rlS-RJ
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: pool-100-15-86-101.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([IPv6:::1]) [100.15.86.101]:41848
X-Source-Auth: lberger@labn.net
X-Email-Count: 11
X-Source-Cap: bGFibm1vYmk7bGFibm1vYmk7Ym94MzEzLmJsdWVob3N0LmNvbQ==
X-Local-Domain: yes
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/manet/7SXPoNQHS-pA7UXCopRA5K36Bw8>
Subject: Re: [manet] ordered data items in DLEP pause extension
X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks <manet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/manet>, <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/manet/>
List-Post: <mailto:manet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet>, <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 21:52:58 -0000

Hi,

David and I discussed this - as I didn't feel strongly about this and 
his comment was based on actual implementation experience, we've put 
together a version that addresses his comment.  We also clarified the 
sub data type field definition as it was somewhat under defined in the 
previous version (I views this to be not a technical change, but rather 
an editorial clarification) .

The changes are:
    1) make the Queue Parameter Sub Data Item unordered by adding a 
Queue Index field to the sub-DI
    2) formally define  Sub Data Item Type, the value (of 1) is not changed.

The detailed diff can be seen at:
https://github.com/louberger/dlep-extensions/compare/working/lb/rev-03-comments
and full text can be seen at:
https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/cgi-bin/xml2rfc.cgi?url=https://raw.githubusercontent.com/louberger/dlep-extensions/master/pause/draft-ietf-manet-dlep-pause-extension.xml

*No that this document is post LC*

Does anyone object to this change?

Chairs,
     Please let us know if / when we should submit this rev.

Thank you,
Lou (and David)

PS we'll update the flow control document to have the same clarification 
(#2 above) once we publish this change.

On 6/11/2018 12:56 PM, Wiggins, David - 0665 - MITLL wrote:
>
> In draft-ietf-manet-dlep-pause-extension-03, section 3.1.1 says “Queue 
> Parameter Sub Data Items are an ordered list composed of sub data 
> items with a common format.    The first sub data item is assigned a 
> Queue Index value of 1, and subsequent data items are numbered 
> incrementally.”
>
> I’d rather not allow the order of data items, even though they are sub 
> data items, to convey any meaning.  It isn’t done anywhere else in 
> DLEP (as far as I know), and I think that’s a good thing.  It allows a 
> wider variety of implementations.  I believe this is easily fixed by 
> adding a queue index field to the Queue Parameter Sub Data Item and 
> adjusting the above-quoted sentences.
>
> David
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> manet mailing list
> manet@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet