[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
AD review of: draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-test-sonet-sdh-01.txt
- To: "Ccamp-wg (E-mail)" <email@example.com>
- Subject: AD review of: draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-test-sonet-sdh-01.txt
- From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 23:12:11 +0100
Here are my comments. Pls address them and do a quick
revision. I do not intend to issue IETF Last Call before
IETF meeting in SF is over.
- 2nd para in sect 1
s/is being developed/has been developed/ ??
- You have 16-bit fields for which you specify values as:
And it is then not clear (to me) which bit you actually mean
Maybe better to do:
- I see a few times "Note that no change is required to the
TestsStatusSuccess and TestStatusFailure messages".
That however seems very obvious, because they will ALWAYS go
over the control channel. I think there is never a change to
those messages is there... but with making this statement, one
gets the impression that sometimes they will be changed.
- sect 220.127.116.11. I see:
The type of the trace message. The following values are
defined. All other values are reserved and should be sent as
zero and ignored on receipt.
1 = SONET Section Trace (J0 Byte)
2 = SONET Path Trace (J1 Byte)
3 = SONET Path Trace (J2 Byte)
4 = SDH Section Trace (J0 Byte)
5 = SDH Path Trace (J1 Byte)
6 = SDH Path Trace (J2 Byte)
The text about "All other valies are reserved and should be sent
as zero..." is OK for field that have bitmasks or such, but here
you seem to be using the field as an integer field, no?
- last sentence before sect 18.104.22.168... pls check:
Section . 22.214.171.124
Actually also check the sentence before that
- page 11/12/13 I see strange formatting that causes lines to
go beyond col 72, and I am not sure that proper sections
are referenced when I see
Section 4. ..1.3.1
- Security considerations are unacceptable.
- No new security considerations compared to what?
- Which security considerations DO apply?
- IANA considerations
- pls be specific as to in which name space(s) you want
IANA to assign code points. And within such a name space,
specify from which block (e.g. Consensus based? user sapce?
- copyright section has a year of 2001 !!??