[PWE3] Re: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation-14.txt

OK, if -15 has those fixes I will be happy. Thanks.

     Brian

Luca Martini wrote:
> Brian,
> 
> I sent the document out , as there where many changes to it , and I 
> wanted to start from a fresh copy of the draft , with most of the 
> changes incorporated. I think that reving a draft is the best way to 
> document the changes , and making sure that we are all on the same page ...
> 
> 
> Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> 
>> Most of my DISCUSS comments are fixed, thanks, but I still have two 
>> points
>> I'm afraid.
>>
>>> 3.3. Interface Parameters Sub-TLV type
>>
>> ...
>>
>>>    For each allocation a length field MUST also be specified in one of
>>>    the following formats:
>>>      - A decimal integer
>>>      - Text as follows:"up to X", where X is a decimal integer
>>>      - Up to 3 different decimal integers.
>>
>>
>>
>> Why is "A decimal integer" listed? It is a subset of "Up to 3 
>> different decimal integers".
> 
> Yes, it is redundant. I will edit it to include only the "Up to 3 
> different decimal integers."
> 
>> Does "up to X" mean "up to and including X"?
> 
> 
> yes. I will edit the text to make it clear by adding the following comment:
> 
> "The text "up to X" is meant to mean up to and including X."
> 
> 
>>
>>> 3.4.1. Attachment Individual Identifier Type
>>
>> ...
>>
>>>    For each allocation a length field MUST also be specified as a
>>>    decimal integer.
>>
>>
>> This is a substantive change since the document was submitted to
>> the IESG, since the -12 version had the same three alternatives
>> as above. Has this change got WG consensus?
>>
>>> 3.4.2. Attachment Group Identifier (AGI) Type
>>
>> ...
>>
>>>    For each allocation a length field MUST also be specified as a
>>>    decimal integer.
>>
>>
>> Ditto.
> 
> I do not believe that there is any question on this point in the WG. The 
>  length was already included in the protocol specification.  The length 
> was omitted from this allocation by an oversight. This has been 
> corrected, and I have not heard any comments on this topic in the WG.
> ( And I CCed the WG )
> Thanks.
> Luca
> 
>>
>>     Brian
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
pwe3 mailing list
pwe3@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3