Re: Two more working group last calls

["Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>]

Hi Lou,

I just consulted with our AD on the "correct" way of doing this. He 
suggested...

- The abstract and introduction should very clearly state that this
 document is an update to the previous document.
- The introduction should point to a section somewhere in the
 document (possibly an annex) that describes the differences in
 some detail.
- Otherwise, the new document can stand on its own.

I think that is what we currently have.

Do you feel strongly about your suggested change?

Cheers,
Adrian
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lou Berger" <lberger@labn.net>
To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
Cc: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 10:23 PM
Subject: Re: Two more working group last calls


> Adrian,
>         See below for minor comments:
>
> At 11:12 AM 4/11/2008, Adrian Farrel wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Sorry for the continued bombardment with reviewing activity.
> >
> > Here are two drafts that were discussed in Philadelphia with the intention 
> > to go to WG last call as soon as possible.
> >
> > draft-ietf-rfc4420-bis-02.txt
>
> I assume that you mean draft-ietf-ccamp-rfc4420bis-02.txt.
>
>
> > This is the revision to RFC 4420 to fix the TLV encoding to be consistent 
> > with the previous RSVP-TE RFCs. The fix is to the interpretation of the 
> > Length field.
> > Although we might not expect much in the way of review comments for this 
> > I-D, it would be very helpful if you could read the I-D, point out any 
> > typos, and send a note to say that you have read the document and believe 
> > it is ready for publication.
>
> Only a minor suggestion here:
>
> I suggest moving the rational for the updated provided from section 14 to 
> section 1.  Specifically:
>
> - drop section 14
> - section 1, 1st paragraph: drop "See Section 14 for a summary of 
> changes." and add:
>    Prior to the change, the Length field indicated the length of the
>    Value field only. After the change, as described in Section 3, the
>    Length field indicates the length of the whole TLV. This change means
>    that this document is consistent with the subobject format defined in
>    [RFC3209] and the TLV format defined in [RFC3471].
>
> Lou