Subject: [hybi] AD review of draft-ietf-hybi-permessage-compression-21

From: Barry Leiba <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 10:55:11 +0100

It's been a long time (more than two years) since I sent this document
back to the working group for a re-write.  I'm happy to say that the
result is excellent -- this version is well written and clear, and I
appreciate the work that was put into it.  Thank you.

I have only two minor comments (below), but neither need delay
anything.  I will request IETF last call on the document as soon as I
send this message.  Please address my comments and post a revised I-D
whenever you're ready -- you don't need to wait for the last call to
complete.

Comments:

-- Section 5 --

   A server declining all offered PMCEs MUST not include any element
   with PMCE names.

Please make it "MUST NOT" (with "NOT" in all caps).

-- Sections 6.1 and 6.2 --

   An endpoint MUST use the following algorithm to send a message in the
   form of an uncompressed message.

...and...

   An endpoint MUST use the following algorithm to receive a message in
   the form of an uncompressed message.

Please make these algorithms into numbered lists, as you've done with
the other two (the compressed message versions).

That's it.  Again, thanks for the good work.

Barry, ART Director

---

From: Takeshi Yoshino <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 11:22:48 +0900

> appreciate the work that was put into it.  Thank you.
Thank you, Barry.

Here, I'd like to thank again everyone who helped me improving the draft by
technical/grammar review, implementation, discussion.

Addressed the comments and published -22. The algorithms in 6.1 and 6.2
have been formatted into numbered lists including only 1 item, but I agree
with Barry as it's more readable given the symmetry with the texts for a
compressed message.

---

From: Barry Leiba <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 08:48:20 +0100

> Addressed the comments and published -22. The algorithms in 6.1 and 6.2 have
> been formatted into numbered lists including only 1 item, but I agree with
> Barry as it's more readable given the symmetry with the texts for a
> compressed message.

He-he.. I had thought to put the "Otherwise" parts into #2 items, and
that's what I'd meant.  But I'm OK with it as you've done -- as you
say, it reads better and more consistently that way.

Barry

---

From: Takeshi Yoshino <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 15:19:43 +0900

On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 4:48 PM, Barry Leiba <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> have

I was wondering if you meant so or not. I refrained from doing so as
they're not ordered steps but are cases of an if-branch.

I agree that it would be better to make them formatted into a list. How
about non-number list like this? Numbered one would be better?

   2.  Process the compressed data as follows:

       *  If this PMCE is the last extension to process of outgoing
          messages, build frame(s) by using the compressed data instead
          of the original data for the message payload, and set the
          "Per-message Compressed" bit of the first frame, then send the
          frame(s) as described in Section 6.1 of RFC6455.

       *  Otherwise, pass the transformed message payload and modified
          header values including the "Per-message Compressed" bit value

---

From: Barry Leiba <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 11:30:23 +0100

> I was wondering if you meant so or not. I refrained from doing so as they're
> not ordered steps but are cases of an if-branch.
>

That would work...

Barry

---

From: Takeshi Yoshino <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 14:05:46 +0900

Addressed in -23 (diff:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-hybi-permessage-compression-23).
If this looks rather bad, I'd revert it to the previous one.

Thanks

Takeshi

On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 7:30 PM, Barry Leiba <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> they're

---

From: Barry Leiba <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 08:09:40 -0300

> If this looks rather bad, I'd revert it to the previous one.

I think it looks fine, and there's no need to fiddle with it any
further.  Thanks.

Barry