Subject: [rohc] Approval of draft-ietf-rohc-rfc3242bis

From: Allison Mankin <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:20:59 -0700

Hi, Carsten, Lars-Erik, and ROHCers,

RFC 3242bis was approved today.  Congratulations on this 
fine work.  Thanks to Carsten for the shepherd's writeup.

I intended to explain to the WG the slight revision that came 
before the IESG review (00 -> 01); this did not involve any technical
changes.  The requests I made are below, and they all were easy
for Lars-Erik, acting as Editor, to fulfill, without touching
the technical content.  The document would have blocked without
these small fixes, and it passed with them.  

Allison
Transport Area Director

P.S. I'm looking forward to the TCP profile - happy to see that
 moving forward, and happy that it is in review by TCPM as well
 as here!

-----
A section called Differences from RFC 3242 needs to be there
and summarize the problem that caused RFC 3242 to be
reissuing.  Basically it needs to include info on this:

http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rohc/current/msg02580.html
----

Since this is the -bis,  the document should remove 
the references that state this is a new* profile,
and tone down some of the language that markets the need
for this versus the standard profile (the latter appear in
a number of places, and are especially heavy in the Intro).
In not every case is "new" the wrong word.  It is OK in
4.1, for instance, though you could substitute "It defines
three packet types distinct from " since this document does
not define them.

-----
For readability, make sure the terminology section is pointed to 
from sections that use terms and acronyms before it.
(e.g. the new Differences from RFC 3242 section)

----

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