Re: [Rmt] AD comments on draft-ietf-rmt-bb-fec-basic-schemes-revised-04

Mark Watson <mark@digitalfountain.com> Sat, 12 July 2008 21:39 UTC

Return-Path: <rmt-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: rmt-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rmt-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C36E73A6934; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 14:39:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: rmt@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rmt@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C97923A6934 for <rmt@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 14:39:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.532
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.532 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id W+Y+lTfgR-81 for <rmt@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 14:39:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server515.appriver.com (server515c.exghost.com [72.32.253.79]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED04C3A6837 for <rmt@ietf.org>; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 14:39:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by server515.appriver.com (CommuniGate Pro PIPE 5.2.0) with PIPE id 52882984; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 16:14:37 -0500
Received: from FE1.exchange.rackspace.com ([72.32.49.5] verified) by server515.appriver.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.0) with ESMTP id 52882960; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 16:14:32 -0500
Received: from 34093-EVS4C1.exchange.rackspace.com ([192.168.1.68]) by FE1.exchange.rackspace.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sat, 12 Jul 2008 16:14:13 -0500
Received: from 69.3.232.210 ([69.3.232.210]) by 34093-EVS4C1.exchange.rackspace.com ([192.168.1.58]) via Exchange Front-End Server owa.mailseat.com ([192.168.1.79]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 21:14:12 +0000
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.4.0.080122
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2008 14:14:11 -0700
From: Mark Watson <mark@digitalfountain.com>
To: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>, rmt@ietf.org
Message-ID: <C49E6CB3.2C2AA%mark@digitalfountain.com>
Thread-Topic: AD comments on draft-ietf-rmt-bb-fec-basic-schemes-revised-04
Thread-Index: AcjkZDqJeVG1V1BXEd2FbwAX8sJN9g==
In-Reply-To: <48086F6F.4010203@ericsson.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Jul 2008 21:14:13.0446 (UTC) FILETIME=[3BFE8E60:01C8E464]
X-Policy: GLOBAL - UNKNOWN
X-Policy: GLOBAL - UNKNOWN
X-Primary: mark@digitalfountain.com
X-Note: This Email was scanned by AppRiver SecureTide
X-Virus-Scan: V-
X-Note: FCH-SI:0/SG:0
X-GBUdb-Analysis: 1, 192.168.1.68, Ugly c=0.746887 p=-0.998577 Source White
X-Signature-Violations: 0-0-0-5700-c
X-Note: Spam Tests Failed:
X-Country-Path: UNITED STATES->PRIVATE->UNITED STATES->UNITED STATES
X-Note-Sending-IP: 72.32.49.5
X-Note-Reverse-DNS: fe1.exchange.rackspace.com
X-Note-WHTLIST: mark@digitalfountain.com
X-Note: User Rule Hits:
X-Note: Global Rule Hits: 82 83 84 85 89 90 158
X-Note: Mail Class: VALID
Subject: Re: [Rmt] AD comments on draft-ietf-rmt-bb-fec-basic-schemes-revised-04
X-BeenThere: rmt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Reliable Multicast Transport <rmt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rmt>, <mailto:rmt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/rmt>
List-Post: <mailto:rmt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rmt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rmt>, <mailto:rmt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: rmt-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: rmt-bounces@ietf.org

I propose to address item 3 by changing the SHOULDs to MUSTs. The other
comments all seem fine to me and I will submit an update shortly.

...Mark


On 4/18/08 2:52 AM, "Magnus Westerlund" <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I have made my AD review of the document and have the following comments.
> 
> 1. Obsolete information in header, abstract and introduction. If I
> understand this correctly this document will replace RFC 3695 and parts
> of RFC 3452 that wasn't included in the already obsoleted one.
> 
> 2. There is a missing "." in the last sentence of section 1.
> 
> 3. Section 3.2.2.2:
> 
> "   The "Reserved" field in the Encoded FEC Object Transmission
>     Information SHOULD be set to zero by senders and its value SHOULD be
>     ignored by receivers."
> 
> Using the definition of SHOULD here makes it pretty difficult to use
> this field in the future. I normally recommends that at least setting it
> needs to be MUST and usually also the ignore on receiver. So that if one
> deploys a new spec that uses these bits would not throw up on them. As I
> am uncertain how widely deployed this definition already is I only ask
> the WG to consider if this should be changed or not.
> 
> 4. Section 5.3:
> 
> I think there needs to be an additional sentence her to specify that if
> a instance is not using the algorithm it needs to specify what it uses.
> 
> 5. Section 9. I think we need to move the registry rules forward from
> the going to be obsoleted RFCs 3695 and 3452. Thus please include the
> registry rules in this section and request that IANA changes the
> pointers for the rules to this doc.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Magnus Westerlund
> 
> IETF Transport Area Director & TSVWG Chair
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ericsson AB                | Phone +46 8 4048287
> Färögatan 6                | Fax   +46 8 7575550
> S-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 


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