From nobody Thu May 11 13:16:26 2023 Return-Path: X-Original-To: taps@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: taps@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EA52C16B5B3; Thu, 11 May 2023 13:16:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.996 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.996 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ifi.uio.no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id a6cVKZh5q0r1; Thu, 11 May 2023 13:16:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-out02.uio.no (mail-out02.uio.no [IPv6:2001:700:100:8210::71]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB5A3C151546; Thu, 11 May 2023 13:16:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ifi.uio.no; s=key2103; h=To:References:Message-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date: In-Reply-To:From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID :Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe :List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=GsbHaINkmQIZuajCt6wrQ6ORU3lIWFBBfyrCdWtOLk8=; b=i5c6CibLtoepsE6Y8fe1rqReQG EiZ54dqBBCaWeqVP3n7sr8D2lKx95Ox+8Mg34tkCE6ByfBESLKmGGFdiWxeYBamjbApfgCko71jvX 5dnTU5/ifgzmMpz9MZWUS6895hYnJnryt/gaYw0VMjZ5SKIU6SsJvyDD6iI8gIWEoza9WOq3onBiA Nw3p8Tj2xg/ImZDqQwe6b813jaIQWmgxFS2MjUDTt1UnnNZV3o/LehXtBKNjp5CLLYjheU3r80G4n uKHiNmVHURi+D9RfxfKDeBuYaZtNBohvNf5Ve4CURXgXbGg7azAEvGF4GWISny2mOAN92sRi9W5eD 8GPbHAYQ==; Received: from mail-mx02.uio.no ([129.240.10.43]) by mail-out02.uio.no with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1pxChw-00Gfum-1s; Thu, 11 May 2023 22:16:12 +0200 Received: from [131.94.186.12] (helo=smtpclient.apple) by mail-mx02.uio.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE-ECDSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) user michawe (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1pxChv-0003pn-2w; Thu, 11 May 2023 22:16:12 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.1\)) From: Michael Welzl In-Reply-To: <87o7mqhcni.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com> Date: Thu, 11 May 2023 16:16:04 -0400 Cc: gen-art@ietf.org, draft-ietf-taps-impl.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, taps@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <87o7mqhcni.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com> To: "Dale R. Worley" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.1) X-UiO-SPF-Received: Received-SPF: neutral (mail-mx02.uio.no: 131.94.186.12 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of ifi.uio.no) client-ip=131.94.186.12; envelope-from=michawe@ifi.uio.no; helo=smtpclient.apple; X-UiO-Spam-info: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-5.0, required=5.0, autolearn=disabled, AWL=0.023, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, UIO_MAIL_IS_INTERNAL=-5) X-UiO-Scanned: E1977CB7456680628E951C0EB9CF9F6D2BA70AA1 X-UiOonly: 43AB6C4DE20DCDA0B0B728891E2F17A05A36D41F Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Taps] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-taps-impl-15 X-BeenThere: taps@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39 Precedence: list List-Id: "IETF Transport Services \(TAPS\) Working Group" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 May 2023 20:16:22 -0000 > On May 11, 2023, at 3:49 PM, Dale R. Worley = wrote: >=20 > Michael Welzl writes: >>> On Apr 13, 2023, at 8:32 PM, Dale Worley via Datatracker = wrote: >>> So to fix this, I recommend that the authors go through the text >>> looking for modal words, [...] >>=20 >> - that seems to be the right way to approach this. It is a very good >> suggestion, many thanks. Indeed, while the case you quote is covered >> by the API draft, it would be terrible if we=E2=80=99d miss any other >> requirement there. >=20 > Fortunately, it sounds like these are all things I would classify as > wording issues. But I do apologize for the sheer number of minor > changes that you'll have to consider. You really shouldn=E2=80=99t! What you did is to improve our spec - = what more could we ask for? You did put a lot of effort into this, it = is us who have to be thankful! >> As a way forward, my plan is to file issues in our github ( >> https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts >> ) for the smaller things >> below, [..] >=20 > Yes, that's certainly sufficient. I am just a reviewer, and for minor > things, I expect nothing more than that the authors consider whether > some improvement should be made (or not). Great - many thanks! Cheers, Michael