Thanks for the comments. At Wed, 23 Jul 2008 21:56:33 -0800, Michael Chen wrote: > Here are some notes I have accumulated so far for the July draft: > > A) Section 6.2.1 should add "network byte-order" to the "idiosyncrasies" > of the language.
Fair enough, though of course this is how almost everything in IETF is done. > B) In 6.2.2, the 'relo_token' 32-bit value should be 0xD2454c4f not > 0xC2454c4f. Thanks. > C) In 6.2.2, the description for 'var_list_length' should be > "...following THREE length fields..." > > D) In 6.2.3.1, the description for 'error_info' says "This MUST be empty > (zero length) > except as specified below." However, nothing in "below" explicitly > mention being used > in 'error_info'. It's *far* below. I'll fix. > E) In 6.2.2.2, "ROUTE-LOG-RESPONSE" should be RESPONSE-ROUTE-LOG per 6.2.2. > > F) Section 6.4.2.1.1 must clarify whether the ICE candidate string is > with or without > the prefix "candidate:" as defined in draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-19 > section 15.1. Right. I suspect we'll want replace this with a new encoding.... > G) Suggestion: In Forwarding Header (6.2.2), move the 'overlay' or > 'transaction_id' fields > next to each other, so that when computing the signature, both > fields can be fed to the > signing function in a single block instead of two separate ones. This doesn't add a lot of performance value as compared to the hashing and digital signing. -Ekr _______________________________________________ P2PSIP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
