[xrblock] Review of draft-zorn-xrblock-rtcp-xr-al-stat-06

"Claire Bi(jiayu)" <bijy@sttri.com.cn> Thu, 19 July 2012 06:59 UTC

Return-Path: <bijy@sttri.com.cn>
X-Original-To: xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 496A521F8604 for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 23:59:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 2.534
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.534 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_20=-0.74, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, SARE_RECV_IP_218078=1.666]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8Sso3UokbvDd for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 23:59:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from corp.21cn.com (corp.forptr.21cn.com [121.14.129.40]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53C6F21F8602 for <xrblock@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 23:59:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ip?218.80.215.132? (unknown [10.27.101.10]) by corp.21cn.com (HERMES) with ESMTP id E03D11A4897 for <xrblock@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 14:59:58 +0800 (CST)
HMM_ATTACHE_NUM: 0000
HMM_SOURCE_IP: wmail.10.27.101.10.1297632044
HMM_SOURCE_TYPE: WEBMAIL
Received: from ip<218.80.215.132> ([218.80.215.132]) by 21CN-entas10(MEDUSA 10.27.101.10) with ESMTP id 1342681195.19494 for xrblock@ietf.org ; Thu Jul 19 15:00:02 2012
1/X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
2/X-Total-Score: 3:
X-FILTER-SCORE: to=<9993838d90848c618a8695874f909388>, score=<1342681202jX2vjvv2vvvvvjvvXvjX2vbrJX99O99H99f99b9DLOHf>
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 14:59:55 +0800
From: "Claire Bi(jiayu)" <bijy@sttri.com.cn>
To: xrblock <xrblock@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <1212936072.41421342681199601.JavaMail.hermes@ent-web4>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_Part_3848_1494839657.1342681195772"
HMM_WEBCLN_IP: 10.27.10.84
X-HERMES-SENDMODE: normal
X-HERMES-SET: KoH0oguRsun5ALVzckz3EqaqqOumqw==
Subject: [xrblock] Review of draft-zorn-xrblock-rtcp-xr-al-stat-06
X-BeenThere: xrblock@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Metric Blocks for use with RTCP's Extended Report Framework working group discussion list <xrblock.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/xrblock>, <mailto:xrblock-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/xrblock>
List-Post: <mailto:xrblock@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xrblock-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xrblock>, <mailto:xrblock-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 06:59:12 -0000

I have reviewed draft-zorn-xrblock-rtcp-xr-al-stat-06 and find some typos in the section 3.2.2:

"
   Interval Metric flag (I): 2 bits
      This field is used to indicate whether the metrics block is an
      Interval or a Cumulative report,
 
   Reserved: 6 bits
      This field is used to indicate whether the Burst/Gap Discard
      Summary Statistics metrics are Sampled, Interval or Cumulative
      metrics, that is, whether the reported values applies to the most
      recent measurement interval duration between successive metrics
      reports (I=10) (the Interval Duration) or to the accumulation
      period characteristic of cumulative measurements (I=11) (the
      Cumulative Duration) or is a sampled instantaneous value (I=01)
      (Sampled Value).
"
I think this should be fixed as follows:
"
   Interval Metric flag (I): 2 bits
      This field is used to indicate whether the Burst/Gap Discard
      Summary Statistics metrics are Sampled, Interval or Cumulative
      metrics, that is, whether the reported values applies to the most
      recent measurement interval duration between successive metrics
      reports (I=10) (the Interval Duration) or to the accumulation
      period characteristic of cumulative measurements (I=11) (the
      Cumulative Duration) or is a sampled instantaneous value (I=01)
      (Sampled Value).
 
 Reserved: 6 bits
      This field is reserved for future definition.  In the absence of
      such a definition, the bits in this field MUST be set to zero and
      MUST be ignored by the receiver.
"

Beside this, I believe this draft has already been in good shape.
 
 
Regards
 
Claire Bi