I discussed this with Paul. Can we add a sentence about what to do if the received string is more than 32 characters?
On Wed, Jun 1, 2022 at 9:24 PM <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Paul, > > Thank you for the review. > > Please see inline. > > Cheers, > Med > > > -----Message d'origine----- > > De : Paul Wouters via Datatracker <[email protected]> > > Envoyé : jeudi 2 juin 2022 05:12 > > À : The IESG <[email protected]> > > Cc : [email protected]; [email protected]; > > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] > > Objet : Paul Wouters' Discuss on draft-ietf-alto-cost-mode-03: > > (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) > > > > Paul Wouters has entered the following ballot position for > > draft-ietf-alto-cost-mode-03: Discuss > > > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to > > all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to > > cut this introductory paragraph, however.) > > > > > > Please refer to > > https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot- > > positions/ > > for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT > > positions. > > > > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found > > here: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-cost-mode/ > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ---- > > DISCUSS: > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ---- > > > > Probably an easily answered issue, but I am not too familiar with > > ALTO. > > > > The string MUST be no more than 32 characters, and it MUST > > NOT contain > > characters other than [...] > > > > Are there implementations that already deployed a cost string with > > more than 32 > > characters or characters not in this newly imposed set of > > characters? > > [Med] No. > > What > > should happen if that is in use? That is, is this protocol > > modification > > potentially breaking interoperability with older implementations? > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ---- > > COMMENT: > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ---- > > > > While no fan of "patch RFCs", thank you for at least putting the > > OLD and NEW > > text in one document, so an implementer and reviewer doesn't have > > to switch > > between documents and get confused about what was read was the old > > doc or new > > doc. > > > > That said, patching in the text "This document" feels a little > > weird. What RFC > > does "This document" then refer to? Perhaps change "This document > > defines two > > cost modes" to "Two cost modes are defined". > > [Med] OK. > > > > > Future documents that define a new cost mode SHOULD indicate > > > > I think that SHOULD can be a MUST. > > [Med] We don't use MUST here because we do have a default behavior > specified in the sentence right after: "If not explicitly indicated, the > new cost mode applies to all cost metrics." > > > _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > > Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations > confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc > pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez > recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler > a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages > electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, > Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou > falsifie. Merci. > > This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged > information that may be protected by law; > they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. > If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and > delete this message and its attachments. > As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been > modified, changed or falsified. > Thank you. > >
_______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
