Subject: [port-srv-reg] Status of draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2011 20:01:36 +0000

Hi,
I have the document (tentatively) on February 17th IESG telechat agenda. 
I would really like not to move the document (due to holidays and other 
IESG related work).

So when can I see the updated draft that addresses my AD review and IETF 
LC comments?

I am still catching up and will review thread with comments from Cullen. 
If I have some specific editorial suggestions, I will post them here. 
But please don't wait for that before posting 
draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports-10.txt

Thanks,
Alexey, as AD

---

From: Joe Touch <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2011 23:19:23 -0800

Hi, Alexey,

I had one issue to address from the discussion on the main list, which I 
will resolve tomorrow.

Joe

On 2/9/2011 12:01 PM, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> Port-srv-reg mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/port-srv-reg

---

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 16:22:05 +0000

Joe Touch wrote:

> Hi, Alexey,
>
> I had one issue to address from the discussion on the main list, which 
> I will resolve tomorrow.

It would be good to get the new revision today, or by the end of the 
weekend at the latest. Otherwise I might have to push the document to 
March 3rd telechat, which I would rather not do due to my workload and 
holidays.

-- 
IETF Application Area Director, <http://www.ietf.org/iesg/members.html>
Internet Messaging Team Lead, <http://www.isode.com>
JID: same as my email address

---

From: Joe Touch <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 10:59:11 -0800

AOK - I'm plowing through it right now.

Joe

---

From: Joe Touch <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 12:45:29 -0800

Hi, Alexey,

Attached is the updated source (xml), txt, and rfcdiff showing the 
updates from -09.

Here are the changes. So the question to you is - do we submit this as -10?

(can someone on port-srv-reg please do the svn check-in of the attached 
XML? I can't seem to from the web interface)

Joe

----

Tom Petch's LC comments on reordering:
- reordered Sec 8.1.2 to explain earlier that user ports can be approved 
by one of three processes, not only expert review. added a note that 
IANA can always use the Expert Review process to inform their participation
- also added a corresponding note in sec 7.2 on this issue

Wes Eddy's TSVDIR comments
- all incorporated/addressed

Alexey's AD comments
- all incorporated/addressed

added some (overdue) DCCP clarification raised by Gorry in March 2010
- entire doc updates RFC 5595 on how DCCC service code assignments occur
- note that some service codes are not assigned (0, max, and private use)

------

---

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 23:06:16 +0000

> Here are the changes. So the question to you is - do we submit this as 

This looks good to me, I think you should submit this.

I will double check a couple of comments from Cullen and Sam, but I 
think if any extra changes are needed, they can be done in -11 or via an 
RFC Editor note.

> (can someone on port-srv-reg please do the svn check-in of the 
> attached XML? I can't seem to from the web interface)
>
> Joe
>
> ----
>
> - reordered Sec 8.1.2 to explain earlier that user ports can be 
> approved by one of three processes, not only expert review. added a 
> note that IANA can always use the Expert Review process to inform 
> their participation

I think this is covered.

> - all incorporated/addressed

Do you have a pointer to his comments?

> - all incorporated/addressed

All addressed, thanks.

> - note that some service codes are not assigned (0, max, and private use)

Addressed as well.

---

From: Joe Touch <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 15:49:44 -0800

Hi, Alexy,

On 2/11/2011 3:06 PM, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
...
> Do you have a pointer to his comments?

Below.

Joe

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: tsv-dir review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports-09
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 14:54:18 -0600
From: Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-MS00)[ASRC AEROSPACE CORP] 
<[email-masked]>
To: TSV Dir <[email-masked]>, TSV Area <[email-masked]>
CC: tsvwg IETF list <[email-masked]>, 
"[email-masked]" 
<[email-masked]>

I've reviewed this document as part of the transport area directorate's 
ongoing effort to review key IETF documents. These comments were written 
primarily for the transport area directors, but are copied to the 
document's authors for their information and to allow them to address 
any issues raised. The authors should consider this review together with 
any other last-call comments they receive. Please always CC 
[email-masked] if you reply to or forward this review.

This draft is ready for publication as a BCP RFC.

A few small comments which I don't think should be blocking are:

1 - on page 11, in section 6, "near-infinite" is a bit of an exaggeration

2 - on page 16, there's a typo: "MUST accompanied" should be "MUST be 
accompanied"

3 - on page 17, it may be a good idea to be clear whether the Assignee 
can be an individual (not just an organization)

4 - on page 17, Contact is defined as a person, but using the IESG as 
the Contact makes it a group (not a "person"); it might be good to 
clarify Contact as a person or group of people

5 - on page 17, in the Reference definition, it may be good to qualify 
the description of broadcast/multicast/anycast use by the protocol as 
being IP-layer broadcast/multicast/anycast to disambiguate from possible 
application-layer mechanisms for these that might be used

--
Wes Eddy
MTI Systems

---

From: Joe Touch <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 17:04:54 -0800

PS - here's the posted version. ID nits caught a missing phrase on the 
2119 line. I just submitted it as -10.

Lars/someone who uses svn - can you please check-in the attached XML?

Joe

---

From: Lars Eggert <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2011 11:54:16 +0200

Done

On 2011-2-12, at 3:04, Joe Touch wrote:

> PS - here's the posted version. ID nits caught a missing phrase on the 2119 line. I just submitted it as -10.
> 
> <rfcdiff.htm><draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports.xml><draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports-10.txt>_______________________________________________