Re: [tsvwg] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctp-ndata-12: (with COMMENT)

[Ben Campbell <[e-mail]>]

> On Aug 30, 2017, at 4:02 AM, Michael Tuexen <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>> On 30. Aug 2017, at 00:33, Ben Campbell <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> 
>> Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
>> draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctp-ndata-12: Yes
>> 
>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
>> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
>> introductory paragraph, however.)
>> 
>> 
>> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
>> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>> 
>> 
>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctp-ndata/
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> COMMENT:
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 
> Hi Ben,
> 
> thanks for your review. Comments in-line.
> 
> Best regards
> Michael
>> I wish this had been around back when we were figuring out how to share
>> connections in MSRP.
>> 
>> Otherwise, just a couple of editorial comments:
>> 
>> - Abstract: "Multiple ways for performing
>>  this selection, called stream schedulers, are defined. "
>> I assume you mean that they are defined in this document rather than in
>> previously existing documents, but it seems ambiguous.
> Changed to
> 
> Multiple ways for performing this selection, called stream schedulers, are
> defined in this document.
> 

Works for me.

>> 
>> - 2.1: "The sender uses two counters for
>>     each outgoing stream, one for ordered messages, one for unordered
>>     messages.  All counters are independent and initially 0."
>> 
>> s/ all / both  ; unless this rule is intended to apply to more counters than
>> the ones mentioned in the previous sentence.
>> 
>> 
> With "all counters" I'm referring to two counters for each outgoing stream. But
> there might be more than one outgoing stream. So if there are n outgoing streams,
> I'm referring to 2 * n counters. And these 2 * n counters are mentioned in the
> previous sentence.

I read it in the context of the previous sentence, that is, both counters in a given stream. But this is not a blocking comment; do what you think is best.

Thanks!

Ben.