IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] AD Evaluation comments for draft-ietf-tsvwg-ieee-802-11-07

Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 13 September 2017 04:42 UTC

Return-Path: <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B71B133B33; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 21:42:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 ycXCgZToFts9; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 21:42:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x231.google.com (mail-wm0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D86B91243F6; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 21:42:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x231.google.com with SMTP id g206so4079236wme.0; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 21:42:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=z6f3FAuCaLyL4VsaQExGfRL5jCX+BDSfHullF7Uf+1I=; b=GET+aM8lV/KZksMQ3xrDxY8yMAJcbMmMQj7w9NYQYG8xRlGRjrbEIGXlzJ170RPWOu yl6413LRi2ynaCdaBC28Ha/lwSRxXz5tsNp7/tcxNrrlEBSBpC3U0Pi6GylyXhKXinQN R1rY7ReViul5v1UQeCxAmuXebYw4WrKAlMoPcf+VE12q/GlkExcXH858LwS7j5upf5Dw uXo+MmNKBtFgxhzI1DbQNnQcWHci9l0SA5SOizrp6g2IboA5c5OzOGmBxne2PdEqSAdP QaVYCX/M082O93+7betQosOkYClCGZ+hoK6LSAmy/qyG+ydEL6gM1XoeJy1iRTdRbwvK VHxg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=z6f3FAuCaLyL4VsaQExGfRL5jCX+BDSfHullF7Uf+1I=; b=obBZPzbFy2WYSuImcutzeMgvYTXSYICplkZ2KXL8P58uV8FNhPnBOtx0wUXd0Nn/mO k+4k90pdvT9IEgMkCI++1Uswzg4/3xrZcweO9kPdfAse7yFYlyhetxTXwe0rq4AZJqv0 aNnqjzeBMv1JdD8QQXmbE+r2F+eY4ElQTZmc/0YPfXcyCU/nEj6UfcdQyWbLBr1nNC1a H1WWORsofQZ+JltqiIS3G6wWmM9teCVj3C6VeZRWpHQuag9viiqCEXJ4RIvsKfRmmLF+ ImxjcBK1/fmyAr/jTqcFq/bxtpI8lD6Im05vCDlDfNg8VGKwDz/7PZQsh2UTsSw4+PaZ pwPw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUgbZGYEnuE44ft/kwmA0e1pc1jTxImMmbpKBpn+a9Ug5nSSrR1R o9W//6LstU4hdA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QC+oeaB1mltYUyq8Evk7eDPb2NtEuY25YMAvCh7ry/i2oP3mMBff0gqPTgfByZSX5/VYBHz9g==
X-Received: by 10.28.99.84 with SMTP id x81mr1249570wmb.148.1505277766095; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 21:42:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:646:c005:a10:b546:44b4:f5bc:2d37? ([2601:646:c005:a10:b546:44b4:f5bc:2d37]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p71sm300191wmd.40.2017.09.12.21.42.44 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 12 Sep 2017 21:42:45 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.0 \(3445.1.6\))
From: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKKJt-dnnYxO0C9ahXURu8aDjpRP=vtKn8z2JsiRm+YP+mLrVw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 21:42:42 -0700
Cc: David Black <david.black@dell.com>, "David L. Black" <david.black@emc.com>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-tsvwg-ieee-802-11@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <D33894F3-8C87-4B3A-AC0C-6D1A48EED13D@gmail.com>
References: <CAKKJt-dnnYxO0C9ahXURu8aDjpRP=vtKn8z2JsiRm+YP+mLrVw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.1.6)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/ZxmPsLdp1_f_uoCB7kZTXM_1iX8>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] AD Evaluation comments for draft-ietf-tsvwg-ieee-802-11-07
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsvwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2017 04:42:49 -0000

On Sep 12, 2017, at 7:55 PM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I'm looking at this text,
> 
>    There is also a recommendation from the Global System for Mobile
>    Communications Association (GSMA), specifically their Mapping Quality
>    of Service (QoS) Procedures of Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6) and WLAN
>    [RFC7561] specification.  This GSMA specification was developed
>    without reference to existing IETF specifications for various
>    services, referenced in Section 1.1.  
>    
> and I'm not quite sure how an IETF-stream Informational RFC produced by a working group becomes "a recommendation from GSMA" and "a GSMA specification". I recognize the names of the RFC 7561 authors, and I see the connection, but I would have thought that the reference would have been to something more obviously tied to GSMA. Is there any reference that could be cited, to help people who didn't sit two desks away from one of the authors see the connection?

You might take a look at RFC 7561 section 4.2 and reference [6]. It says that it mandates GSMA-specified DSCP mappings.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email