IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TICTOC] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tictoc-ptp-enterprise-profile-04.txt

Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com> Mon, 27 October 2014 08:44 UTC

Return-Path: <richardcochran@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: tictoc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tictoc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2787A1A0354; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 01:44:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 zp7Yi20kWv_Q; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 01:44:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x22b.google.com (mail-wi0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22b]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 195F21A0020; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 01:44:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wi0-f171.google.com with SMTP id hi2so2067398wib.16 for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 01:44:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=IIRO/AGVjeaGzLr4OTRmqDiS91sgTlAJpH8g6kgpyLg=; b=RvgwCzBCud6423r9UA7n87/CwzMtkQfaHVWcbG1ndnQrJUzqCd7cyCKGa4DpEkIGGl 1Esw+R7YaL4aGD6qt4Qsvs9Qv8JH9U6wFm36h/EUNOp5lIfbqEMzWwsDLr/UBorlK6DY gQ4+wqWL2JUATLtAFob1ykrxHMfa6EV2xEbA1EuhwjHLXEC2bgnlnVUesRLkkSk/rFwX XLGwABeaYNPNjd42KqWVdhT/vaqKU6wnJYjS8X4bsLwRsBQxFbIvSqi3lpkUL0j/G/ul UPMRF/GeCczogWphsCIO6Fy/M6J9fDciPuI1n7vQH32KBoLGEUpjUsnmbDh0+XkWqMN+ n5Ng==
X-Received: by 10.180.218.136 with SMTP id pg8mr18860985wic.37.1414399466506; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 01:44:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from netboy (089144222140.atnat0031.highway.bob.at. [89.144.222.140]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id fu5sm14789175wjb.26.2014.10.27.01.44.23 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 27 Oct 2014 01:44:25 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 09:44:17 +0100
From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>
To: internet-drafts@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20141027084415.GB4748@netboy>
References: <20141024035728.3975.46631.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20141024035728.3975.46631.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tictoc/fKSJsF_zACSudeHAOqQNB9mSnps
Cc: tictoc@ietf.org, i-d-announce@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [TICTOC] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tictoc-ptp-enterprise-profile-04.txt
X-BeenThere: tictoc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Timing over IP Connection and Transfer of Clock BOF <tictoc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tictoc>, <mailto:tictoc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tictoc/>
List-Post: <mailto:tictoc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tictoc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tictoc>, <mailto:tictoc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 08:44:30 -0000

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 08:57:28PM -0700, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
> There's also a htmlized version available at:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tictoc-ptp-enterprise-profile-04

I think the following passage from Section 14, page 11, is
unnecessarily restrictive.

     Enterprise Profile Clocks will interoperate with clocks operating
     in other profiles if the clocks in the other profiles obey the
     rules of the Enterprise Profile.  These rules MUST NOT be changed
     to achieve interoperability with other profiles.

I doubt you can prevent people from bending the rules with this sort
of text. This passage almost begs the question of why this profile is
so against interoperability in the first place.

Thanks,
Richard

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email