Subject: [NSIS] Issues 15 - 23

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 10:47:07 +0200

Hi Cedric,

Thanks for the comments, I can support them.  

What does the WG feel?

br,
John

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Cedric Aoun [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: 23 January, 2003 02:22
> To: [email-masked]'
> Subject: [NSIS] comments on draft-ietf-nsis-req-06.txt
> 
> 
> Hi,
> I have some comments on the draft, sorry for being late ...
> 
> Issue Name: ? 
> Submitter name: Cedric Aoun
> Submitter email address: [email-masked] 
> Date first submitted: 22/01/2003 
> Reference: none 
> Document: draft-ietf-nsis-req-06.txt 
> Comment type: E 
> Priority:  3  
> Section: Abstract, page 1 line 41
> Rationale/Explanation of issue:typo error "in recent year"
> Requested change:"in the recent year"
> 
> Issue Name: ? 
> Submitter name: Cedric Aoun
> Submitter email address: [email-masked] 
> Date first submitted: 22/01/2003 
> Reference: none 
> Document: draft-ietf-nsis-req-06.txt 
> Comment type: E 
> Priority:  3  
> Section: 1, page 2 line 51
> Rationale/Explanation of issue:typo error "to t4est"
> Requested change:"to test"
> 
> Issue Name: ? 
> Submitter name: Cedric Aoun
> Submitter email address: [email-masked] 
> Date first submitted: 22/01/2003 
> Reference: none 
> Document: draft-ietf-nsis-req-06.txt 
> Comment type: E 
> Priority:  3  
> Section: 1, page 3 line 3
> Rationale/Explanation of issue:typo error "requirement 
> documents", "other
> application"
> Requested change:"requirements document", "other applications"
> 
> Issue Name: ? 
> Submitter name: Cedric Aoun
> Submitter email address: [email-masked] 
> Date first submitted: 22/01/2003 
> Reference: none 
> Document: draft-ietf-nsis-req-06.txt 
> Comment type: E 
> Priority:  3  
> Section: 2, page 3 line 14
> Rationale/Explanation of issue:text editing/formating
> Requested change:Need to have a formal section introduction 
> or take it out
> 
> Issue Name: ? 
> Submitter name: Cedric Aoun
> Submitter email address: [email-masked] 
> Date first submitted: 22/01/2003 
> Reference: none 
> Document: draft-ietf-nsis-req-06.txt 
> Comment type: E 
> Priority:  3  
> Section: 2, page 4 line 17
> Rationale/Explanation of issue: simplify the text and make it generic
> "Control Information: the information the governs for instance the QoS
> treatment to be applied to a flow or aggregate, including the 
> service class,
> flow administration, and any associated security or 
> accounting information."
> 
> Requested change:"Control information: information that governs the
> treatment to be applied to a flow or aggregate"
> 
> 
> Issue Name: ? 
> Submitter name: Cedric Aoun
> Submitter email address: [email-masked] 
> Date first submitted: 22/01/2003 
> Reference: none 
> Document: draft-ietf-nsis-req-06.txt 
> Comment type: E 
> Priority:  3  
> Section: 3, page 5 line 10
> Rationale/Explanation of issue: simplify the text
> "A basic goal should be to re-use these wherever possible, 
> and to focus
> requirements work at an early stage on those areas where a 
> new solution is
> needed (e.g. an especially simple one). We also try to avoid defining
> requirements related to internal implementation aspects."
> Requested change:"A basis goal should be to re-use the 
> proposed architecture
> wherever possibleâEUR
> 
> 
> Issue Name: ? 
> Submitter name: Cedric Aoun
> Submitter email address: [email-masked] 
> Date first submitted: 22/01/2003 
> Reference: none 
> Document: draft-ietf-nsis-req-06.txt 
> Comment type: T 
> Priority:  2  
> Section: 3, page 6 line 29
> Rationale/Explanation of issue: What about the NSIS 
> responder? we should not
> impose where that function is hosted
> âEURoeThe placement of the NSIS Initiators and NSIS Forwarders 
> is not fixed.âEUR
> Requested change: âEURoeThe placement of the NSIS Initiators, 
> responders and NSIS
> Forwarders is not fixed.âEUR
> 
> 
> Issue Name: ? 
> Submitter name: Cedric Aoun
> Submitter email address: [email-masked] 
> Date first submitted: 22/01/2003 
> Reference: none 
> Document: draft-ietf-nsis-req-06.txt 
> Comment type: E 
> Priority:  3  
> Section: 3, page 8 line 39
> Rationale/Explanation of issue: âEURoe the protection of 
> non-signaling messages âEUR¦
> corresponding application layer protocolâEUR.
> It could confuse people on point #7 âEURoeprotection of 
> non-signaling messages is
> outside the scope of the protocolâEUR.
> Requested change:
> Either we put it in the annex as is or suggest to reword it as:
> âEURoeThe NSIS Forwarder need to have sufficient information to 
> be able to
> uniquely identify a specific user flow even when security 
> mechanisms are
> applied to that flowâEUR
> 
> 
> Issue Name: ? 
> Submitter name: Cedric Aoun
> Submitter email address: [email-masked] 
> Date first submitted: 22/01/2003 
> Reference: none 
> Document: draft-ietf-nsis-req-06.txt 
> Comment type: T 
> Priority:  2  
> Section: 5.1.1 
> Rationale/Explanation of issue: âEURoeMUST be applicable for different
> technologiesâEUR IsnâEUR(tm)t the requirement about having 
> different types of services
> that could be signaled with the NSIS protocol? It is probably 
> best to reword
> it for more clarity
> 
> 
> Issue Name: ? 
> Submitter name: Cedric Aoun
> Submitter email address: [email-masked] 
> Date first submitted: 22/01/2003 
> Reference: none 
> Document: draft-ietf-nsis-req-06.txt 
> Comment type: E 
> Priority:  3  
> Section: 5.2.2 
> Rationale/Explanation of issue: Typo error.âEURoeNo constraint 
> MUST be posed the
> signaling and NSIS Forwarders to 
>      be in the data path.âEUR
> Requested change: could be simply reworded to "independence 
> of the signaling
> path and the data path"
> 
> 
> Issue Name: ? 
> Submitter name: Cedric Aoun
> Submitter email address: [email-masked] 
> Date first submitted: 22/01/2003 
> Reference: none 
> Document: draft-ietf-nsis-req-06.txt 
> Comment type: E 
> Priority:  3  
> Section: 5.3.3 page 13 line 41
> Rationale/Explanation of issue: Typo error.âEURoethe network 
> nodes can locally
> repair this type errorâEUR
> Requested change: âEURoethe network nodes can locally repair 
> this type of errorâEUR
> 
> Issue Name: ? 
> Submitter name: Cedric Aoun
> Submitter email address: [email-masked] 
> Date first submitted: 22/01/2003 
> Reference: none 
> Document: draft-ietf-nsis-req-06.txt 
> Comment type: T 
> Priority:  2  
> Section: 5.3.3 page 14 line 3
> Rationale/Explanation of issue: âEURoeService upgrade available: 
> If a previously
> requested better service becomes available.âEUR
> We might want to have this notification sent even if the 
> service was not
> asked for it. The decision of sending or not the notification 
> is a policy
> issue but we need to make sure that we can send the notification. 
> 
> 
> Issue Name: ? 
> Submitter name: Cedric Aoun
> Submitter email address: [email-masked] 
> Date first submitted: 22/01/2003 
> Reference: none 
> Document: draft-ietf-nsis-req-06.txt 
> Comment type: E 
> Priority:  3  
> Section: 5.3.4 page 14 line 30
> Rationale/Explanation of issue: rewording - âEURoeto also get a 
> description of
> what amount of  resources a request is possibleâEUR
> Requested change: âEURoeto also get a description of what amount 
> of available
> requested resources  are availableâEUR
> 
> 
> 
> Issue Name: ? 
> Submitter name: Cedric Aoun
> Submitter email address: [email-masked] 
> Date first submitted: 22/01/2003 
> Reference: none 
> Document: draft-ietf-nsis-req-06.txt 
> Comment type: E 
> Priority:  3  
> Section: 5.4.1 page 15 line 14
> Rationale/Explanation of issue: rewording - âEURnote that a 
> provider or that
> particular services requestedâEUR 
> Requested change: âEURoenote that the provider of the particular 
> requested
> serviceâEUR
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Issue Name: ? 
> Submitter name: Cedric Aoun
> Submitter email address: [email-masked] 
> Date first submitted: 22/01/2003 
> Reference: none 
> Document: draft-ietf-nsis-req-06.txt 
> Comment type: E 
> Priority:  3  
> Section: 5.4.2 page 15 line 18
> Rationale/Explanation of issue: rewording - âEURSHOULD 
> possible to add and
> remove local domain information"
> Requested change:  "It SHOULD be possible to add and remove 
> local domain
> informationâEUR
> 
> 
> Issue Name: ? 
> Submitter name: Cedric Aoun
> Submitter email address: [email-masked] 
> Date first submitted: 22/01/2003 
> Reference: none 
> Document: draft-ietf-nsis-req-06.txt 
> Comment type: T 
> Priority:  2  
> Section: 5.4.5 page 16 line 3
> Rationale/Explanation of issue: âEURoeHowever, the network MUST 
> NOT know that a
> relationship between the grouped flows exists. There MUST NOT be any
> transactional semantic associated with the grouping. It is 
> only meant for
> optimization purposes and each reservation MUST be handled 
> separately from
> each other.âEUR
> 
> We need to have a MAY for having semantics to group flows 
> that are bundled.
> I agree that the flows could have independent properties and 
> associated
> resource reservations could still be taken down or processed 
> independently.
> The usefulness of grouping these flows is primarily to tear 
> down all their
> associated states at the same time without repeating the tear 
> down message
> several time (i.e. command aggregation) and to minimize the 
> size of the
> message data.
> 
> Regards
> Cedric
> _______________________________________________
> nsis mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsis
> 
_______________________________________________
nsis mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsis