Subject: Comments on draft-tuexen-tsvwg-sctp-chunk-flags-00.txt

From: Gorry Fairhurst <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 12:03:27 -0700

The above draft is proposed for WG adoption. I understand it is seeking 
PS status. Given this is primarily an IANA action, have you checked with 
Michelle that this is an appropriate way to ammend the IANA rules.

My own comments for consideration in the next rev are:

* I would prefer the acronym SCTP to also appear in the title, to help 
people searching for the document by Title.

* I think section 3.1 is intended to change Section 14.1 of RFC 4960 - 
It may be more precise for the new document to explicitly say that the 
text in the new section replaces the entire text of section 14.1, if 
this is the intended case.

* Again, if I understand correctly, does the following section then add 
to the new contents of section 14.1 of RFC 4960?

* Section 3.3.
- Is this table also asking IANA to create a registry and populate this 
with these initial values?

Best wishes,

Gorry

---

From: Michael Tuexen <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2010 01:53:13 +0100

Hi Gorry,

thanks for your suggestions. See my comments in-line.

Best regards
Michael

On Mar 20, 2010, at 8:03 PM, Gorry Fairhurst wrote:

> 
> The above draft is proposed for WG adoption. I understand it is seeking PS status. Given this is primarily an IANA action, have you checked with Michelle that this is an appropriate way to ammend the IANA rules.
> 
> * I would prefer the acronym SCTP to also appear in the title, to help people searching for the document by Title.
OK, title of the next rev will be
Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) Chunk Flags Registration
> 
> * I think section 3.1 is intended to change Section 14.1 of RFC 4960 - It may be more precise for the new document to explicitly say that the text in the new section replaces the entire text of section 14.1, if this is the intended case.
Hmm. The beginning of Section 3 reads:
   Section 3.1 describes the updated procedure for chunk type
   registration and replaces Section 14.1 of [RFC4960].
Isn't this explicit enough? Or should it be stated elsewhere?
> 
> * Again, if I understand correctly, does the following section then add to the new contents of section 14.1 of RFC 4960?
Correct. The beginning of Section 3 continues:
  Section 3.2 defines the new procedure for chunk flag registration.
> 
> * Section 3.3.
> - Is this table also asking IANA to create a registry and populate this with these initial values?
Correct. That is what I wanted to say by writing:
 
   The initial values of the tables for the chunk flags for already
   defined chunk types is given in Section 3.3.

Let me know if you want any concrete changes...

Best regards
Michael

---

From: Gorry Fairhurst <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 20:54:14 -0700

OK. If I have any more comments, I'll let you know in the next day.

Gorry