Re: [NSIS] QSPEC Questions

Hi Jerry, 

			Hannes,

	> From: Hannes Tschofenig <Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net
<mhtml:{B096A9AC-8D5F-4D5A-AACE-EC56A1B5E65A}mid://00000166/!x-usc:mailto:Ha
nnes.Tschofenig@gmx.net> >
	> Subject: [NSIS] QSPEC Questions
	> To: nsis@ietf.org
<mhtml:{B096A9AC-8D5F-4D5A-AACE-EC56A1B5E65A}mid://00000166/!x-usc:mailto:ns
is@ietf.org> 
	> Date: Saturday, November 1, 2008, 3:11 PM
	> 
	> 
	> Based on Dan's AD review comments for
draft-ietf-dime-qos-parameters-06 I
	> need to ask a few questions regarding the QSPEC draft:
	> 
	> * There is no description of the differences between TMOD-1 and
TMOD-2.
	> Useful to say something about the difference?  
	> 

	Discussed in some detail in Section 3.3.1 (as Elwyn pointed out).

Thanks. 

	> * Where does the description for <Path Jitter>, <Path PLR> and
	> <Path PER>
	> come from? There is no reference to another RFC given in these
sections.

	References for <Path Jitter> are [RFC3393], [Y.1540], [Y.1541], as
given in Section 3.3.2.
	Reference for <Path PLR> is [Y.1541], as given in Section 3.3.2.
	Reference for <Path PER> is [Y.1541], as given in Section 3.3.2.

	These references should also be added to the headings of Sections
5.2.4, 5.2.5, and 5.2.6, respectively.

Thanks. 

	> 
	> * Why is Path Jitter STAT4(Reserved) included in the <Path Jitter>
	> parameter?
	> 

	The computation of Path Jitter is discussed in [Y.1541], including
numerical examples.  
    Perhaps Al Morton (editor of [Y.1541]) can provide explanatory text to
add to the QSPEC document.

Thanks. 

	> * The encoding of the  <RPH Priority> Parameter is not inline with
	> http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-tsvwg-emergency-rsvp-09.txt
<mhtml:{B096A9AC-8D5F-4D5A-AACE-EC56A1B5E65A}mid://00000166/!x-usc:http://to
ols.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-tsvwg-emergency-rsvp-09.txt> . The ALRP
	> Priority and the Reserved octets 
	> positions are inversed. 
	> 
	> * <DSTE Class Type> Parameter
	> 
	> The QSPEC draft says:
	> "
	> DSTE Class Type: Indicates the DSTE class type.  Values currently
	>   allowed are 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.
	> "
	> 
	> RFC 4124 does not define a value of 0. Where does 0 come from? 
	> In RFC 4124 the field is only 3 bits long. Why is it 8 bytes long
in the
	> QSPEC document? 

	I agree with Elwyn that the QSPEC DSTE Class Type parameter should
be aligned with RFC 4124.  It also appears that an IANA registry is not
needed since none is defined in RFC 4124.

I deleted the IANA registry from the DIME document and aligned the parameter
encoding with the one described in RFC 4124. 

Ciao
Hannes

	Jerry

	> 
	> Your feedback is appreciated!
	> 
	> Ciao
	> Hannes
	>

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