Subject: [issue77] Comments from Furquan

From: Weiming Wang <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 14:35:13 +0000

New submission from Weiming Wang <[email-masked]>:

Hi All,
    Just thought of adding some comments on the draft - before the last 
call is done....

1) 3.3.4.1 Batching.... It's unclear from the text about how batching 
should be achieved. Is there
any indication from the PL layer to the TML layer that there will be 
more PDUs to come and
the TML should wait so that it can batch things up? Otherwise, TML would 
simply ship out
the PDU as soon as it is received. Batching would introduce a bufferring 
requirement in the
TML and if so, there may need to be an explicit indication from the PL 
layer that a set of PL
PDUs are to be batched.

2) There are about 6 references to the word "byte" - As has been done 
with a lot of other
RFCs, I think it would be completely unambigous only if we mean "octet" 
rather than "byte".
(Byte is computer vendor dependent definition - though 8bits in 99% 
cases - still
octet is unambigous). I would like to see the refences to byte be 
replaced with octets.

3) ID assignment: For all the ID range assignments, I think it would 
make sense to
start from +1 rather than 0 of that range. By this I mean, we really 
don't want
0x00000000 to actually mean that it is an FEID. This could actually be 
the unassigned
value for that device which has to be configured with some value. We 
should start
from 0x00000001 - 0x3FFFFFFF for the FEID range
similarly, if the TS switch is actually only meant to do type selection, 
it would be the
same case with CEID and multicast ID - i.e. by first just looking at the 
TS bits, I
have figured that it is FE,CE or multicast, and the remaining bits would 
start the
range from x0000000

4) Sec 5.2 and 5.3 - TLV and ILV "L" length part does not explicitly 
specify
what is the size of each unit (is it octets, words, Dwords like in main 
header etc.)
(obviously, I would imagine it would be in octets - but let's clarify it)

5) Could we replace "combo" with "combination" throughtout the text? 
It's more
formal that way.

6) ....

Sorry, I have to run and haven't had the chance to go though the rest of 
the
document. I will try to do so.

Thanks,

-- 
Furquan Ansari
Bell Labs Research Ph : 732-949-5249
Holmdel, NJ Fax: 732-949-4556

----------
category: Editorial
draft: draft-ietf-forces-protocol
messages: 384
nosy: weiming
priority: May fix
status: Pending
title: Comments from Furquan

___________________________________________________
Forces issue tracker <[email-masked]>
<http://www.mip4.org/issues/tracker/forces/issue77>
___________________________________________________