Re: [MMUSIC] Comments on draft-ietf-mmusic-traffic-class-for-sdp-02

"Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <> Sat, 03 November 2012 02:06 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D24691F0C9C for <>; Fri, 2 Nov 2012 19:06:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9zl47eXOmdQW for <>; Fri, 2 Nov 2012 19:06:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91F161F0C9D for <>; Fri, 2 Nov 2012 19:06:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=2600; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1351908378; x=1353117978; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=48EA0aQwTsfCWCnEKoxPAorNU0FS5AWTvvBq0UcE7rg=; b=LBQIKkEJDJGIu2d4b1W2wltTEubtRIbc5+U+yfNEQ0+zwa1ciFH1yhtt /XkAF/otcsc6b/eSnNEAQVOBqr53rEHxTda1yET/ID7Wzeij771MmFmBK L9ObktvWEwWFu8eTWu/xhjriPWMfc5TCE5OPiEcNJ84U7LM2fndmY9qxD M=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,702,1344211200"; d="scan'208";a="138363994"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP; 03 Nov 2012 02:06:18 +0000
Received: from ( []) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qA326ICG029405 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Sat, 3 Nov 2012 02:06:18 GMT
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.001; Fri, 2 Nov 2012 21:06:17 -0500
From: "Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <>
To: Paul Kyzivat <>, IETF MMUSIC WG <>
Thread-Topic: [MMUSIC] Comments on draft-ietf-mmusic-traffic-class-for-sdp-02
Thread-Index: AQHNuI2nFvIdbeLQH0SHrq50DRVfk5fXXRzw
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2012 02:06:16 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
x-tm-as-product-ver: SMEX-
x-tm-as-result: No--43.615700-8.000000-31
x-tm-as-user-approved-sender: No
x-tm-as-user-blocked-sender: No
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Comments on draft-ietf-mmusic-traffic-class-for-sdp-02
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2012 02:06:22 -0000

Please see inline.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [] On
> Behalf Of Paul Kyzivat
> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 8:05 PM
> Subject: [MMUSIC] Comments on draft-ietf-mmusic-traffic-class-for-sdp-02
> I have some comments on this new version of the document. (Sorry!)
> Section 3:
> I know we have been through this many times, and its much better now.
> But I still see one issue:
> The ABNF says an adjective is a tcl-token, which allows "-" and
> alphanumerics. But then the text says that an adjective and be preceded
> by underscore ("_") to indicate that it is non-standard. This means you
> are *extending* the syntax in text beyond what the ABNF allows. IMO that
> is a very bad idea.
> Instead, I recommend altering the syntax to permit the underscore in
> adjectives in the way you intend it to be used. I would suggest some
> syntax for this but I don't know if you want to permit non-standard
> qualified adjectives.

I'd like to recommend removing the text regarding the '_' and leaving the ABNF as is. At IETF 84 I thought we agreed to address this by lowering the bar to register a new adjective.


> Also, as we have previously discussed, this way of using non-standard
> adjectives is quite analogous to the use "P-" or "X-" headers that has
> been found troublesome and generally banned. So I expect this might have
> trouble getting through IESG review. I thought we had discussed having
> the non-standard adjectives be registered using a
> first-come-first-served registration policy.
> ISTM that the portion of this section that discusses "aq" ought to be in
> its own section, and then referenced from the iana considerations section.
> Section 6.4:
> I don't find any explanation of how or if to register qualified
> adjectives. The section title says "Unqualified Adjective Registration",
> but the inital set of registered values includes "aq" (the qualifier
> part of qualified adjectives), and some values intended to be qualfied
> by "aq:" (such as "admitted"). This certainly implies to me that I can
> use each of these as an unqualified adjective.
> If the intent is to register such things then I would expect to see the
> full qualified adjectives listed for registration. E.g. "aq:admitted"
> 	Thanks,
> 	Paul
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list