Dear Kate, Thanks a lot for your comments. Regarding my comment regarding how to introduce the term "Multicast Application Port", my point is that I think we should do it in a place different from the introduction (or in addition to in the introduction). But maybe this is just a personal bias. You can leave it like it is, because I think that if this is relevant the RFC Editor will flag it and propose alternatives.
Thanks, Carlos On Sun, May 31, 2026 at 2:17 PM Karstens, Nate <[email protected]> wrote: > Carlos, > > > > Thanks for the feedback! We uploaded version 06 to address your comments ( > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-intarea-multicast-application-port/). > Please see below for individual replies (marked [NK]). > > > > Cheers, > > > > Nate > > > > *From:* CARLOS JESUS BERNARDOS CANO <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Thursday, May 21, 2026 09:42 > *To:* [email protected] > *Cc:* int-area <[email protected]> > *Subject:* [Int-area] Shepherd review of > draft-ietf-intarea-multicast-application-port-05 > > > > Hi, I have completed my shepherd review of > draft-ietf-intarea-multicast-application-port-05. The document is in good > shape overall. I have two minor comments for the authors to consider before > we proceed. (1) In the last paragraph before Section > > Hi, > > > > I have completed my shepherd review of > draft-ietf-intarea-multicast-application-port-05. The document is in good > shape overall. I have two minor comments for the authors to consider before > we proceed. > > (1) In the last paragraph before Section 1.1, the sentence "An application > may use this port in conjunction with a unicast port to balance out > deficiencies related to multicast distribution" uses "may" in lowercase. If > the intent is to grant explicit permission (i.e., a normative MAY per BCP > 14), it should be capitalized. If it is purely descriptive, lowercase is > fine, but it would be good if the authors could confirm their intent. > > [NK] There are good arguments for either approach. In the balance, given > that other places in the document discuss using a different port for the > source port, it seems to make the most sense to change this to MAY. We also > made this paragraph use two sentence to contrast the differing (but > related) ideas. > > (2) The term "Multicast Application Port" is used as a proper noun > throughout the document (including in the title) but is never formally > introduced or defined. A short definitional sentence early in Section 1 or > Section 2, such as "This port is referred to in this document as the > Multicast Application Port", would improve clarity. > > [NK] The third paragraph of the introduction introduces the term, though > in a manner that perhaps not as explicit as what you’re suggesting: > > > > …this document assigns a UDP port that may be used with multicast > applications: the Multicast Application Port. > > > > I tried out some alternatives using the wording you suggested, but the > phrase “in this document” seemed to imply that it might be referred to > differently elsewhere, which may cause more confusion in the end. So, I > left it unchanged for now, but we can continue exploring this if you would > like. > > Neither comment is a blocker. Happy to discuss. > > Carlos > > > > -- > > CARLOS J. BERNARDOS https://www.it.uc3m.es/cjbc/ > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.it.uc3m.es/cjbc/__;!!EJc4YC3iFmQ!RMo14NjfEpDmRvHgQwV37LykeOVsFFHubzXnP87L26zSkIPRPKdRu7OoASgLZuacTueTJAg9XOp7G6n5kQ$> > Universidad Carlos III de Madrid > > RTS/CTS podcast: https://castopod.cjbc.eu/@RTSCTS > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/castopod.cjbc.eu/@RTSCTS__;!!EJc4YC3iFmQ!RMo14NjfEpDmRvHgQwV37LykeOVsFFHubzXnP87L26zSkIPRPKdRu7OoASgLZuacTueTJAg9XOoqC6Lg8w$> > > YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/CacharREDando/ > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.youtube.com/CacharREDando/__;!!EJc4YC3iFmQ!RMo14NjfEpDmRvHgQwV37LykeOVsFFHubzXnP87L26zSkIPRPKdRu7OoASgLZuacTueTJAg9XOp6t0PI2A$> > > ------------------------------ > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any attachments are for the sole > use of the intended recipient(s) and contain information that may be Garmin > confidential and/or Garmin legally privileged. If you have received this > email in error, please notify the sender by reply email and delete the > message. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this communication > (including attachments) by someone other than the intended recipient is > prohibited. Thank you. >
_______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
