Re: [xrblock] WGLC fordraft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-burst-gap-discard-08.txt

"Claire Bi(jiayu)" <> Thu, 20 December 2012 03:37 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A55D21F851F for <>; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 19:37:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.245
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.245 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.176, BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, SARE_RECV_IP_218078=1.666]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2Xj2o2eB09HW for <>; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 19:37:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C279E21F851E for <>; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 19:37:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bijiayu-nb ( []) by (HERMES) with ESMTP id 537321A4842; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:37:22 +0800 (CST)
Received: from bijiayu-nb ([]) by 21CN-entas5(MEDUSA with ESMTP id 1355974642.23181 for ; Thu Dec 20 11:37:28 2012
0/X-Total-Score: 0:
2/X-Total-Score: 0:
X-FILTER-SCORE: to=<8593908e82948482618297829a824f84908e9993838d90848c618a8695874f909388>, score=<13559746487577j7a5jq0+LQf77777a7JoJJfJrof+1Ua8RJJJJJrJ>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:38:29 +0800
From: "Claire Bi(jiayu)" <>
To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <>, "" <>
Message-ID: <>
X-mailer: Foxmail 6, 15, 201, 23 [cn]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====003_Dragon238265742434_====="
Subject: Re: [xrblock] WGLC fordraft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-burst-gap-discard-08.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Metric Blocks for use with RTCP's Extended Report Framework working group discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 03:37:37 -0000

This draft looks to be in good shape. I just have one minor comment, please see below:

Section 3.2
1. In the definition of block length:
      The length of this report block in 32-bit words, minus one.  For
      the Burst/Gap discard block, the block length is equal to 3.
The text hasn’t mentioned the definition of the receiver if a value other than 3 is received. Would it be better written:
The length of this report block in 32-bit words, minus one, in
      accordance with the definition in[RFC3611] .  For the Burst/Gap 
discard block, the block length is equal to 3.  The block
      MUST be discarded if the block length is set to a different value.

Thanks and Regards,

From:  Romascanu, Dan (Dan) 
Date:  2012-12-06  20:14:46 
Subject:  [xrblock] WGLC fordraft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-burst-gap-discard-08.txt 
This is a (second) Working Group Last Call for  
Please read and review this document, and send your comments, questions and concerns to the WG list before December 20, 2012. If you read the document, have no comments and you believe that the document is ready for submission to the IESG as a Standards Track document please send a short message as well to help us in determining the level of review and consensus. 
Thanks and Regards,
xrblock mailing list
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 7404 (20120821) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.