Subject: [Tsvwg] Comments on draft-ietf-tsvwg-user-error-spec-01

From: Magnus Westerlund <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 16:51:53 +0200

Hi,

I did reveiw the draft before the meeting. Sorry to be slow in sending 
out the comments.

1. Is it really the best use of User_ERROR_SPEC object to only allow it 
on the new Error Code? I can understand the desire to allow error 
reporting in case previously not possible. But is there not a benefit in 
allowing the USER_ERROR_SPEC object to be present also for other error 
codes? Thus allowing implementations to provide additional information 
when existing error codes is the correct ones to be used?

2. I think you need to clarify which numbers from IANA that needs to go 
where. I would recommend that you use different identifiers for numbers 
to be assigned in the text and then are clear in the IANA section which 
number that comes from which place.

3. Section 3.1: Length definition:
"The Length contains the total length of the subobject in bytes,
         including the L, Type and Length fields."

What is the "L" in the subobject?

Cheers

Magnus Westerlund

IETF Transport Area Director & TSVWG Chair
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM/M
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                | Phone +46 8 4048287
Torshamsgatan 23           | Fax   +46 8 7575550
S-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: [email-masked]
----------------------------------------------------------------------