Re: [xrblock] AD evaluation: draft-ietf-xrblock-independent-burst-gap-discard-01

Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> Wed, 08 June 2016 22:56 UTC

Return-Path: <alissa@cooperw.in>
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 5F8C412D7FC for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Jun 2016 15:56:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.721
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.721 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cooperw.in header.b=yAtMj42g; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=s4nKrxjb
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 6F4OV75Ja0Ek for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Jun 2016 15:56:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC14A12B03F for <xrblock@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Jun 2016 15:56:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FA2F208EB; Wed, 8 Jun 2016 18:56:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 08 Jun 2016 18:56:13 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-sasl-enc :x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=mPLBFFqsKxAmtMoGcdEOZdg60BQ=; b=yAtMj4 2gjSTO/qtN3Tfik7QUULjr3mETNH43s6FnwNqNBcLGSKHr8W4pswkEGUw3GEDsXr iY9cS9eh5Kr1kz3eFnUUg14oy44HeABpvKZAN6nPro9VRA8JYCGunercRUQoKLb0 E6jNqwdRDuurWxDwqmcYwC+Gpzt/5Q+1fjy0k=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=smtpout; bh=mPLBFFqsKxAmtMo GcdEOZdg60BQ=; b=s4nKrxjbIKIqnsmZCEwXN3GYH83gm957CBVtwNhLsJGeQqe FKCEKv3dWThjTWtYP7ekpiMfrQBuApMO13eGUXxxj9cnX9cszrCY57pgFrKD0jpv yFOw+pwEJFlUfeGhLwKt0z5YCE+TpQpwbavEthO8dH4zQjf4rm9WAZwOe9kc=
X-Sasl-enc: GPuyoDyUr7/bLKNPNhmHfeFm+ItjILYjDaEfrZWKSrWU 1465426572
Received: from dhcp-171-68-20-12.cisco.com (dhcp-171-68-20-12.cisco.com [171.68.20.12]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 8E475F29F4; Wed, 8 Jun 2016 18:56:12 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
In-Reply-To: <CAEbPqrzWpVS5_RK=iM3JfpgHt6_uX78KPRJVen-Oyc=Gb8Sivw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2016 15:56:12 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <F862990B-2711-495D-A3F0-7FAFFE9A7DA8@cooperw.in>
References: <78605AD7-F16C-47F0-AD97-334A4E7B7E70@cooperw.in> <CAEbPqrzWpVS5_RK=iM3JfpgHt6_uX78KPRJVen-Oyc=Gb8Sivw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Varun Singh <vsingh.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/xrblock/wvuhX0saCgrSGeCw8zczagmnKok>
Cc: xrblock <xrblock@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [xrblock] AD evaluation: draft-ietf-xrblock-independent-burst-gap-discard-01
X-BeenThere: xrblock@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 08 Jun 2016 22:56:15 -0000

Hi Varun,

Any update on this?

Thanks,
Alissa

> On May 18, 2016, at 5:49 PM, Varun Singh <vsingh.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Alissa,
> 
> Thank you for the review. My comments are inline.
> 
> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 8:26 PM, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> wrote:
>> I have reviewed this document in preparation for IETF last call. Overall it
>> looks good. I have just one question I’d like to discuss before issuing the
>> LC.
>> 
>> Both RFC 6958 and RFC 7002 mention security considerations that are not
>> mentioned in this document. But it seems like similar considerations apply
>> to this block. Why are these not discussed in Section 7?
>> 
> 
> I believe this might have been carried through from RFC7003, which has
> the same text.
> 
> However, adding the considerations from RFC6958 + RFC7003 is more
> appropriate here.
> I will send a proposal before the end of next week.
> 
>> There are also a few nits that should be resolved together with any last
>> call comments:
>> 
>> = Section 2 =
>> 
>> In retrospect it would have been nice to have all of these terms defined
>> once in one document that the other documents could have referred to. Not
>> sure it makes sense to change course now, although it seems you could just
>> refer to the definitions in RFC 7003 rather than repeating them here.
>> 
> 
> Keeping the definitions here would avoid confusion of reading two
> specs to implement this.
> Although, I do not feel strongly about this.
> 
> 
> Will fix the other nits.
> 
> -Varun
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> http://www.callstats.io