Re: [Sigtran] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3331 (1425)
"Brian F. G. Bidulock" <bidulock@openss7.org> Fri, 16 May 2008 20:50 UTC
Return-Path: <sigtran-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: sigtran-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-sigtran-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4700628C2C7; Fri, 16 May 2008 13:50:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: sigtran@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sigtran@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 256FE28C2C7; Fri, 16 May 2008 13:50:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.449
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
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 x4m4edhKDElw; Fri, 16 May 2008 13:50:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gw.openss7.com (gw.openss7.com [206.75.119.236]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05EA728C2B0; Fri, 16 May 2008 13:50:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (IDENT:+pdv7CG9hZcmaB5JzB2i1n9i8dzOOlVJ@ns5.evil.openss7.net [192.168.9.5]) by gw.openss7.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id m4GKoVcB032206; Fri, 16 May 2008 14:50:31 -0600
Received: from wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (IDENT:JT/6mXIR2I5yQEpiMOXGLcT01o+NBdx8@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id m4GKoVEJ025444; Fri, 16 May 2008 14:50:31 -0600
Received: (from brian@localhost) by wilbur.pigworks.openss7.net (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id m4GKoV9V025443; Fri, 16 May 2008 14:50:31 -0600
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 14:50:31 -0600
From: "Brian F. G. Bidulock" <bidulock@openss7.org>
To: Alfred Hönes <ah@tr-sys.de>
Message-ID: <20080516205031.GA25376@openss7.org>
Mail-Followup-To: Alfred Hönes <ah@tr-sys.de>, kmorneau@cisco.com, rdantu@netrake.com, greg@signatustechnologies.com, jheitz@lucent.com, iesg@iesg.org, sigtran@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
References: <20080516194447.GA24123@openss7.org> <200805162010.WAA06666@TR-Sys.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200805162010.WAA06666@TR-Sys.de>
Organization: http://www.openss7.org/
Dsn-Notification-To: <bidulock@openss7.org>
X-Spam-To: <blockme@openss7.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
Cc: greg@signatustechnologies.com, kmorneau@cisco.com, iesg@iesg.org, jheitz@lucent.com, rdantu@netrake.com, sigtran@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Subject: Re: [Sigtran] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3331 (1425)
X-BeenThere: sigtran@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: bidulock@openss7.org
List-Id: Signaling Transport <sigtran.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran>, <mailto:sigtran-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/sigtran>
List-Post: <mailto:sigtran@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sigtran-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran>, <mailto:sigtran-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: sigtran-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: sigtran-bounces@ietf.org
Alfred, Sorry, but the change is still not required. The SDT Identifier field is 32-bits (4 octets as indicated by the parameter length), but the value within that field only occupies 16 its of which only 12-14 bits are significant. No change to the document is necessary. --brian Alfred Hönes wrote: (Fri, 16 May 2008 22:10:19) > > RFC, > > > > There is nothing the matter with the diagram or text. > > > > All that this change would accomplish would be making the description > > for the Signalling Data Terminal Identifier field be the same as the > > description for the Signalling Data Link Identifier field, which would > > then result in two descriptions for SDLI and none for SDTI. > > > > --brian > > Brian, > Sorry, I do not understand the conclusions above. > > To avoid the replication of ensuant mail exchanges and for > the ease of prospective readers, two parallel corrections > have been requested in one Errata Note, tagged a) and b), > for SDTI and SDLI text, respectively, and both changing > "32-bit" to "16-bit" to bring the text in alignment with > the figures showing 16-bit field width. > This 'parallel correction' style is well established. > > Please reconsider your statement after closely re-reading > the Errata Note. Thanks. > > Alfred. > > > > > On Fri, 16 May 2008, RFC Errata System wrote: > > > >> > >> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3331, > >> "Signaling System 7 (SS7) Message Transfer Part 2 (MTP2) - User Adaptation Layer". > >> > >> -------------------------------------- > >> You may review the report below and at: > >> http://www.RFC-Editor.ORG/errata_search.php?rfc=3331&eid=1425 > >> > >> -------------------------------------- > >> Type: Technical > >> Reported by: Alfred Hoenes <ah@TR-Sys.de> > >> > >> Section: 3.3.4.1,p.53 > >> > >> Original Text > >> ------------- > >> a) > >> | The SDT Identifier is a 32-bit unsigned value which may only be > >> significant to 12 or 14 bits depending on the SS7 variant which is > >> supported by the MTP Level 3 at the ASP. Insignificant SDT > >> Identifier bits are coded 0. > >> > >> b) > >> | The SDL Identifier is a 32-bit unsigned value which may only be > >> significant to 12 or 14 bits depending on the SS7 variant which > >> is supported by the MTP Level 3 at the ASP. Insignificant SDLI > >> bits are coded 0. > >> > >> > >> Corrected Text > >> -------------- > >> a) > >> | The SDT Identifier is a 16-bit unsigned value which may only be > >> significant to 12 or 14 bits depending on the SS7 variant which is > >> supported by the MTP Level 3 at the ASP. Insignificant SDT > >> Identifier bits are coded 0. > >> > >> b) > >> | The SDL Identifier is a 16-bit unsigned value which may only be > >> significant to 12 or 14 bits depending on the SS7 variant which > >> is supported by the MTP Level 3 at the ASP. Insignificant SDLI > >> bits are coded 0. > >> > >> > >> Notes > >> ----- > >> In both cases, the field width "32-bit" in the text does not match > >> the parameter breakdown in the immediately preceding artwork. > >> The above corrections are based on the assumption that the figures > >> are correct and the text is in error. > >> > >> Instructions: > >> ------------- > >> This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please > >> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or > >> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) > >> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. > >> > >> -------------------------------------- > >> RFC3331 (draft-ietf-sigtran-m2ua-15) > >> -------------------------------------- > >> Title : Signaling System 7 (SS7) Message Transfer Part 2 (MTP2) - User Adaptation Layer > >> Publication Date : September 2002 > >> Author(s) : K. Morneault, R. Dantu, G. Sidebottom, B. Bidulock, J. Heitz > >> Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > >> Source : Legacy > >> Area : Legacy > >> Stream : IETF > >> Verifying Party : IESG > > > > -- > > Brian F. G. Bidulock | The reasonable man adapts himself to the | > > bidulock@openss7.org | world; the unreasonable one persists in | > > http://www.openss7.org/ | trying to adapt the world to himself. | > > | Therefore all progress depends on the | > > | unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw | > > -- Brian F. G. Bidulock bidulock@openss7.org http://www.openss7.org/ _______________________________________________ Sigtran mailing list Sigtran@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran
- Re: [Sigtran] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3331… Brian F. G. Bidulock
- Re: [Sigtran] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3331… Brian F. G. Bidulock
- Re: [Sigtran] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3331… Brian F. G. Bidulock
- Re: [Sigtran] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3331… Brian F. G. Bidulock
- Re: [Sigtran] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3331… David Laight
- Re: [Sigtran] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3331… Brian F. G. Bidulock