[ppsp] ***SPAM*** 5.939 (5) review of base tracker protocol -07

"Mi Zhang" <13120174@bjtu.edu.cn> Thu, 25 December 2014 01:06 UTC

Return-Path: <13120174@bjtu.edu.cn>
X-Original-To: ppsp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ppsp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F372D1A6F57 for <ppsp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Dec 2014 17:06:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: YES
X-Spam-Score: 5.939
X-Spam-Level: *****
X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=5.939 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_IN_PSBL=2.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Yud1sW5tQNDA for <ppsp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Dec 2014 17:06:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bjtu.edu.cn (mail.bjtu.edu.cn []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC8EE1A6EEC for <ppsp@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Dec 2014 17:06:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: by ajax-webmail-Jdweb3 (Coremail) ; Thu, 25 Dec 2014 09:06:55 +0800 (GMT+08:00)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2014 09:06:55 +0800
From: Mi Zhang <13120174@bjtu.edu.cn>
To: ppsp@ietf.org
Message-ID: <79c11de0.3445.14a7efb7411.Coremail.13120174@bjtu.edu.cn>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_49235_1996362480.1419469615833"
X-Originating-IP: []
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Coremail Webmail Server Version XT2.1.11 dev build 20140513(27092.6055.6128) Copyright (c) 2002-2014 www.mailtech.cn bjtu
X-SendMailWithSms: false
X-CM-TRANSID: d55wygB3WVIwY5tUurQMAA--.5477W
X-CM-SenderInfo: artrjiarxuquxmwxhvlgxou0/1tbiAgQJB1Ryp1lIIwABs6
X-Coremail-Antispam: 1Ur529EdanIXcx71UUUUU7IcSsGvfJ3iIAIbVAYjsxI4VW7Jw CS07vEb4IE77IF4wCS07vE1I0E4x80FVAKz4kxMIAIbVAFxVCaYxvI4VCIwcAKzIAtYxBI daVFxhVjvjDU=
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ppsp/HQm-RCPPuTK5jZPfvax2RVPaVxs
Subject: [ppsp] ***SPAM*** 5.939 (5) review of base tracker protocol -07
X-BeenThere: ppsp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: discussing to draw up peer to peer streaming protocol <ppsp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ppsp>, <mailto:ppsp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ppsp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ppsp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ppsp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ppsp>, <mailto:ppsp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2014 01:06:12 -0000



I have reviewed the PPSP-TP 07, it is very clear and neat. In general, I have no comments about the procedures, but there are some trivial problems:


1)        Section 2.3.2

 c) “transitions to TERMINATE state for that Peer ID and and the SM is destroyed.”


Duplicated “and”.


2)        Section 6.12

Paragraph 5, “To provide more choices for the requesting peer, the tracker may select a new peer list with lower priority from the list of peers and return it to the requesting peer later.”


I am not sure “later” refers to what time or condition specifically.


3)        Section 6.3

Paragraph 3, “The tracker SHOULD be prepared to receive a Request with a repeated TransactionID.”


What kind of preparations SHOULD the tracker make?


4)        Section 7.1.2

Last sentence, “this specification does not details a migration path.”


“details” or “detail” ?


5)        Section 8

Paragraph 2, “No security system can guarantees complete security….”


“guarantees” or “guarantee”?




Mi Zhang