[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [MMUSIC] Question on Pair Priority in ICE-17



Yup, another bug. I haven't kept the appendix up to date here, obviously. Fixed.

-Jonathan R.

Adam Fisk wrote:
Looking more closely at this, it appears this section is slightly inconsistent with section 5.7.2.

I believe that instead of:

"the offerers priority is used as the tie breaker"

it should be:

"the controlling agent's priority is used as the tie breaker"

-Adam



On 8/6/07, *Adam Fisk* <a at lastbamboo.org <mailto:a at lastbamboo.org>> wrote:

    Related nit in the same section:

    "the offerers priority is used as the tie breaker"

    should be:

    "the offerer's priority is used as the tie breaker"

    -Adam


On 8/4/07, *Jonathan Rosenberg* < jdrosen at cisco.com <mailto:jdrosen at cisco.com>> wrote:

        Fixed, thanks for catching it.

        -Jonathan R.

Shan Lu wrote:
> In that case, the two sentences at top of Page 106 should have
"maximum"
> and "minimum" swapped to read as:
>
> ... the pairs are first sorted based on decreasing value of the
> minimum of the two priorities. For pairs that have the same
> value of the minimum priority, the maximum priority is
> used to sort amongst them.
>
> Also "priority" should replace "sequence number" in this section.
>
> Regards,
>
> Shan Lu
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jonathan Rosenberg [mailto: jdrosen at cisco.com
<mailto:jdrosen at cisco.com>]
> > Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 11:25 AM
> > To: Shan Lu
> > Cc: mmusic at ietf.org <mailto:mmusic at ietf.org>
> > Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Question on Pair Priority in ICE-17
> >
> > The formula is correct as written. The term "max/min" sorting
> > refers to
> > the property that, pairs with the largest prioritites come first.
> >
> > -Jonathan R.
> >
> > Shan Lu wrote:
> >> Hi All,
> >>
> >> >From 5.7.2/ICE-17:
> >>
> >> pair priority = 2^32*MIN(G,D) + 2*MAX(G,D) + (G>D?1:0).
> >>
> >> Yet B.5 stated that the objective is to sort on the MAX/MIN
> > property (as
> >> opposed to MIN/MAX). So shouldn't pair priority be defined as:
> >>
> >> pair priority = 2^32*MAX(G,D) + 2*MIN(G,D) + (G>D?1:0)
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Shan Lu
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> mmusic mailing list
> >> mmusic at ietf.org <mailto:mmusic at ietf.org>
> >> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
> >>
> > --
> > Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D. 600 Lanidex Plaza
> > Cisco Fellow Parsippany, NJ
> > 07054-2711
> > Cisco Systems
> > jdrosen at cisco.com
<mailto:jdrosen at cisco.com> FAX: (973) 952-5050
> > http://www.jdrosen.net PHONE: (973)
952-5000
> > http://www.cisco.com
> >
> >
>


--
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D. 600 Lanidex Plaza
Cisco Fellow Parsippany, NJ
07054-2711
Cisco Systems
jdrosen at cisco.com
<mailto:jdrosen at cisco.com> FAX: (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net PHONE: (973)
952-5000
http://www.cisco.com


        _______________________________________________
        mmusic mailing list
        mmusic at ietf.org <mailto:mmusic at ietf.org>
        https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
        <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic>




-- Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D. 600 Lanidex Plaza Cisco Fellow Parsippany, NJ 07054-2711 Cisco Systems jdrosen at cisco.com FAX: (973) 952-5050 http://www.jdrosen.net PHONE: (973) 952-5000 http://www.cisco.com

_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
mmusic at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic