Re: [tcpm] review of rev 14 of RFC 793 bis part 1 of 2 - Editorial Comments

Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk> Tue, 17 December 2019 14:55 UTC

Return-Path: <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7376120852 for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 06:55:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KWfK2cwQVccX for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 06:55:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pegasus.erg.abdn.ac.uk (pegasus.erg.abdn.ac.uk [137.50.19.135]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4CAB1201A3 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 06:55:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gorry-mac.erg.abdn.ac.uk (unknown [IPv6:2001:630:42:110:bcc7:9be3:9906:f232]) by pegasus.erg.abdn.ac.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 906DD1B00244; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 14:55:40 +0000 (GMT)
To: Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com>, "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>
References: <5D669BDA.3000506@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <a8b4062c-fbd8-a33d-416b-c13214f521ee@mti-systems.com>
From: Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <3c9adea8-5224-b6eb-cab3-4adedf8368b7@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 14:55:40 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <a8b4062c-fbd8-a33d-416b-c13214f521ee@mti-systems.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/54HL5dScj_x05gujufUc0C57PLg>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] review of rev 14 of RFC 793 bis part 1 of 2 - Editorial Comments
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tcpm/>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 14:55:47 -0000

On 17/12/2019 14:29, Wesley Eddy wrote:
> Hi Gorry, I've been applying all of the editorial comments from your 
> review, and they should show up in an update later this week.
>
> There are some of them that I had quick responses to.
>
>
>> ---
>> OLD:
>>   An "XXX" indicates a segment which is lost or rejected.
>> - rejected seems odd here.
>> NEW:
>>   An "XXX" indicates a segment that is lost (not processed by the 
>> receiving TCP endpoint).
>
> Strangely, it seems like in 793, the "XXX" is explained, but never 
> occurs otherwise in the text or diagrams.  I think we can just remove 
> this sentence entirely?
>
>
>> multiple OLD: "TCPs" and "a TCP"
>> - This use of a "TCP" as an entity read as very ugly to me. I had to 
>> read the sentences several times to parse them, could we explain that 
>> we mean, i.e. "TCP endpoints" or "TCP implementations" etc. (usually 
>> this seems to mean implementation). 
> I'm fine with doing this.  It's a lot of changes though, so I wanted 
> to quickly see if anyone strongly disagrees with doing this.
>
>
>> OLD:
>>    SYN (pun intended)
>> - I didn't see the pun, can this be explained or omitted?
>
> I think the intent from Jon (or whoever originally wrote this part) 
> was "original sin".  We should probably remove this anyways in order 
> to avoid cultural references that may not be understood by everyone.
>

Understood. That sounds fine. I'm sure you'll do the correct thing,

Gorry