Vijay, thanks for your review. Yann, thanks for your responses. I have entered a No Objection ballot.
Alissa > On Apr 25, 2018, at 1:44 PM, Yann Collet <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks Vijay > > > These are good suggestions. > I’ll use them to improve the spec. > > > Regards, > > Yann > > From: Vijay Gurbani <[email protected]> > Date: Saturday, April 21, 2018 at 17:56 > To: Yann Collet <[email protected]> > Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, > "[email protected]" > <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Genart last call review of draft-kucherawy-dispatch-zstd-01 > > Yann: Thank you for your response. <> > Please see inline. > > > On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 6:22 PM, Yann Collet <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > Hi > > > I can answer the following 2 minor points: > > - S2.1.1.3.1.1: "Value ?0" --> should it be "Value 00"? > > `?0` means it can be either `10` or `00`. > Aka, only the last bit `0` matters. > > When I read that section, it did not strike me that you were using regular > expressions (as far as I can remember, there was no use of regexps in the > section, but I don't have the draft open in front of me). Thus, it looked > like a typo to me. My advice, especially if there is no general use of > regular expressions in the draft, would be to spell it out by saying "00 or > 01". But the end decision is up to you, of course. > > - S2.1.1: The value of the magic number: 0xFD2FB528 --- is there any > significance to it? > > This value was selected to be less probable to find at the beginning of some > random file. > It avoids trivial patterns (0x00, 0xFF, repeated bytes, increasing bytes, > etc.), > contains byte values outside of ASCII range, > and doesn't map into UTF8 space. > It reduces chances that a text file be able to represent this value by > accident. > > OK; that's what I thought. Up to you if you want to add an explanatory > sentence. Won't hurt. > > That's all. Thanks! > > For all other points, I have no comment, and agree with reviewer. > > > Rgds > > Yann Collet > Facebook > > On 4/19/18, 07:55, "Vijay Gurbani" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Reviewer: Vijay Gurbani > Review result: Ready with Nits > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed > by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just > like any other last call comments. > > For more information, please see the FAQ at > > > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__trac.ietf.org_trac_gen_wiki_GenArtfaq&d=DwICaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=_EwH5jTAHV32G13ENXwVrw&m=aMabi5qTp6wXqc6KXVjyGEgbdV5SaoN7tcHeDarFUI8&s=G_jKtEolxxcUUP2uN78WXkDdXi9KsGgZPh0RD34zvIw&e= > > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__trac.ietf.org_trac_gen_wiki_GenArtfaq&d=DwICaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=_EwH5jTAHV32G13ENXwVrw&m=aMabi5qTp6wXqc6KXVjyGEgbdV5SaoN7tcHeDarFUI8&s=G_jKtEolxxcUUP2uN78WXkDdXi9KsGgZPh0RD34zvIw&e=>>. > > Document: draft-kucherawy-dispatch-zstd-01 > Reviewer: Vijay K. Gurbani > Review Date: 2018-04-19 > IETF LC End Date: 2018-04-23 > IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat > > Summary: Ready with 1 minor issue and some nits. > > Major issues: 0 > > Minor issues: 2 > > Nits/editorial comments: 3 > > Minor: > - S4: "... and the usual precautions apply." Here, what are the "usual > precautions"? Are they the ones enumerated below? If so, then > perhaps restate as "... and the usual precautions apply, as enumerated > below.". > > If the usual precautions are not enumerated below, then a reference > should > be provided to a resource(s) that enumerates such precautions. > > - S5: I am curious, why should we remove this section prior to > publication? > It contains pointers to code that is invaluable to implementors. At the > most, I would advise excising company name (Facebook) from the section, > but I would advocate strongly to retain this section as the draft becomes > a RFC. > > Nits/Typos: > - S2.1.1: The value of the magic number: 0xFD2FB528 --- is there any > significance to it? Any insight on how you arrived at this will be > interesting. (I am relating this magic number to the SIP magic cookie > "z9hG4bK" which was chosen so that the probability was very small of > older implementations to randomly pick a branch ID that started with > these characters.) > > - S2.1.1: s/the origina/the original/ > > - S2.1.1.3.1.1: "Value ?0" --> should it be "Value 00"? > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gen-art mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
