IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [xrblock] Review of draft-huang-xrblock-rtcp-xr-decodability-03

Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com> Thu, 19 July 2012 05:51 UTC

Return-Path: <bill.wu@huawei.com>
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 B03E121F866E for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 22:51:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.435
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.435 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.163, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 3Myeprw66TX1 for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 22:51:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dfwrgout.huawei.com (dfwrgout.huawei.com [206.16.17.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4A8B21F866C for <xrblock@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 22:51:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.9.243 (EHLO dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.9.243]) by dfwrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.2.3-GA FastPath) with ESMTP id AID62389; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 01:52:29 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from DFWEML407-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.132) by dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.108) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 22:49:22 -0700
Received: from SZXEML413-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.152) by dfweml407-hub.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.132) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 22:49:21 -0700
Received: from w53375 (10.138.41.149) by szxeml413-hub.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.152) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:49:14 +0800
Message-ID: <4117EB8D29DF4190B55BF2671C79B12E@china.huawei.com>
From: Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>
To: Glen Zorn <glenzorn@gmail.com>, xrblock@ietf.org
References: <FCC100FC8D6B034CB88CD8173B2DA1581C6467A1@EXC-MBX03.tsn.tno.nl> <1342067697.14913.78.camel@gwz-laptop>
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:49:13 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_04FA_01CD65B5.4813B730"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-Originating-IP: [10.138.41.149]
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Subject: Re: [xrblock] Review of draft-huang-xrblock-rtcp-xr-decodability-03
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 05:51:38 -0000

Yes, I tend to agree to put ETSI TR 101.290 as normative reference.

Regards!
-Qin
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Glen Zorn 
  To: xrblock@ietf.org 
  Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2012 12:34 PM
  Subject: Re: [xrblock] Review of draft-huang-xrblock-rtcp-xr-decodability-03


  On Thu, 2012-07-05 at 09:34 +0000, Brandenburg, R. (Ray) van wrote: 


      a.. 
      b.. I noticed the abstract of the draft references  ‘priorities’ without explaining what those priorities are and where they come from (do they come from ETSI TR 101290?). 

  See below.


      a.. ETSI TR 101290 is referenced as a normative reference, although that document is a Technical Report (instead of a TS) and is thus by definition informational. A informative reference might be more suitable. 

  The ETSI classification of a document is largely irrelevant IMHO: I believe that, in the IETF, a normative reference is one which must be read and understood in order to read and understand the document citing it.  ETSI TR 101290 seems to me to fit those criteria in this case.

  ... 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  xrblock mailing list
  xrblock@ietf.org
  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xrblock

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status