Lars,
I haven't seen any reply to these comments yet.
Sorry, I seem to have missed this mail, otherwise I'd asked about it before closing the WGLC.
Section 5.2., paragraph 0: > 5.2. Information Elements
Does it make sense to have default values for the information elements at all? I mean, the data captured by the information model is the result of a particular traceroute measurement, which will have been taken with a fully specified set of parameters. So the defaults will never be actually used, no?
I'd personally prefer sensible defaults for values over "undefined" or "NaN" when creating a new instance of a measurement. That way, I don't have to remember that my code should change the values. YMMV, but I don't think it hurts to have them.
Section 3., paragraph 3: > in the path). Upon receiving a probe, the first hop host decreases > the TTL value by one.
Nit: Routers can decrease the TTL by more than one.
Is this a big issue or can we fix this in IESG-LC?
Henk
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Henk Uijterwaal Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net RIPE Network Coordination Centre http://www.amsterdamned.org/~henk P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414 1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445 The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is one of the choices leaving the office open?
Alan Greenspan on the next elections