IETF Logo Mail Archive

[apps-discuss] AppsDir review of draft-yusef-dispatch-ccmp-indication-04

Glenn Parsons <glenn.parsons@ericsson.com> Fri, 19 July 2013 10:21 UTC

Return-Path: <glenn.parsons@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EE9421E8098; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 03:21:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 nM0VVbZNnEqS; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 03:21:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from usevmg20.ericsson.net (usevmg20.ericsson.net [198.24.6.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9A3F21E8095; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 03:21:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c618062d-b7fc36d0000032ea-e4-51e91336298e
Received: from EUSAAHC008.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.96]) by usevmg20.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 47.50.13034.63319E15; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 12:21:43 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from EUSAAMB101.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.118]) by EUSAAHC008.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.96]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.009; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 06:21:42 -0400
From: Glenn Parsons <glenn.parsons@ericsson.com>
To: "draft-yusef-dispatch-ccmp-indication.all@tools.ietf.org" <draft-yusef-dispatch-ccmp-indication.all@tools.ietf.org>, "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: AppsDir review of draft-yusef-dispatch-ccmp-indication-04
Thread-Index: AQHOg48w1dzXPIkJCkK2xcjz8TTxoplrxC8w
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:21:42 +0000
Message-ID: <2BBEF519D867E04EA729626C246A978702E7A200@eusaamb101.ericsson.se>
References: <alpine.OSX.2.02.1307172139332.7497@mac-allocchio3.garrtest.units.it>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.OSX.2.02.1307172139332.7497@mac-allocchio3.garrtest.units.it>
Accept-Language: en-CA, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.135]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrPLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyuXRPgq658MtAgwPtPBarX65gs3h0vYfJ YsaficwOzB5Llvxk8vhy+TNbAFMUl01Kak5mWWqRvl0CV8bKToGCfbwVqxefY21gfMTVxcjJ ISFgIvHs6m9mCFtM4sK99WxdjFwcQgJHGSVmPFkI5HAAOcsZJe6agNSwCRhI3L1yFaxGRGAN o8TDDb/AmpkFJCRaPj9jBbGFBZwkDs1dChYXEXCXaJ7ymAlkjoiAkcSbBbogYRYBVYmt238y gti8Ar4S7393skCsCpSYshGsk1MgSOJi5w92EJtRQFZi99nrTBCbxCVuPZnPBHGygMSSPeeh zheVePn4HyuErSzxfc4jFoh6HYkFuz+xQdjaEssWvmaGWCsocXLmE5YJjGKzkIydhaRlFpKW WUhaFjCyrGLkKC1OLctNNzLYxAiMlGMSbLo7GPe8tDzEKM3BoiTOu0rvTKCQQHpiSWp2ampB alF8UWlOavEhRiYOTqkGxgWKe3t5tkmdCjZcN6vta++qI1fC9p785nfWgztm5uFj0/SrZqqu apm4R6SoZvakazvTtdOWLwtpijwYUTrV8cu56Sz5Z9e9vrt76r3OYL3P0dPv/tR99Npq/sUE 9maGd7d9Ti2w/ryU74idjD/jsb83XV7qlX4JrI6ROmfjr2uyWlZ7S5jDVQslluKMREMt5qLi RAA9HfbjYgIAAA==
Cc: IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: [apps-discuss] AppsDir review of draft-yusef-dispatch-ccmp-indication-04
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:21:56 -0000

Hello all,

I have been selected as the Applications Area Directorate reviewer for this draft (for background on appsdir, please see http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/ApplicationsAreaDirectorate).

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft.

Document:  draft-yusef-dispatch-ccmp-indication-04

Title: Conference Focus Indicating CCMP Support

Reviewer: Glenn Parsons
Review Date: July 19th, 2013

Summary: The document is needs some improvements in explanation and then would be ready for publication.

Major issues:

There are 4 approaches described here.  And two are standardized.  The abstract indicates that pros/cons are explained, but these only appear for the two not chosen.  The reader would benefit from understanding the difference in choosing between the two approaches standardized.  Further, what is the recommendation for the two not chosen?  Could these still be used and they are shown as a guide?  Or must they not be used?


Minor Issues:

In the abstract:

...the XCON conference event package RFC 4575 [RFC4575] ... This appears to be incorrect.  Do you want to refer the RFC 6502 or 4575 here?  I suspect it is the former, and if so some mention of this in the body of the document (like in 2.1 with XCON-URI) is needed as well as a reference.

In the Introduction:

 RFC 5238 [RFC5239] defines a... ->  RFC 5239 [RFC5239] defines a...

In 2.1, 4.2:
Focus -> conference focus.  Perhaps a reference to the definition of this term would be helpful.
 

Nits:

None.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email