Subject: [Crisp] last minute last call comments on lwz

From: Andrew Newton <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 10:20:48 -0400

All,

Milena and I have been privately discussing a couple of nits in LWZ.   
She's found some readability issues as well as two places where the  
exception cases were not fully fleshed out.  Here is a summary:

1) In Section 3, the description of the octet lengths for the payload  
descriptor in the diagram is incorrect.  At no time is a payload  
descriptor length of 1 considered valid.  Instead, it should be:  
request payload descriptors are 6 to 261 octets.  Response payload  
descriptors are always 3 octets.

2) In Section 3.1.2, the transaction ID value of 0xFFFF should be  
described as "reserved for server use" instead of "invalid".   
Additionally, it should be stated that the server uses this value in  
responses for the following two cases:
    a) The transaction ID in the request could not be read because it  
was truncated.
    b) The transaction ID in the response was 0xFFFF.

3) Similarly, in Section 3.1.7, a fifth exception case needs to be  
added under "descriptor error": when a request is received with an  
incomplete payload descriptor.

-andy

_______________________________________________
Crisp mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/crisp

---

From: Hugo Koji Kobayashi <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 12:31:22 -0200

On Fri, Oct 28, 2005 at 10:20:48AM -0400, Andrew Newton wrote:
...
>    b) The transaction ID in the response was 0xFFFF.

Shouldn't it be "the request was 0xFFFF"?

---

From: Andrew Newton <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 10:39:01 -0400

> Shouldn't it be "the request was 0xFFFF"?

Yes.  Thanks.

-andy