Jari,

Are you able to clear now that these changes have been made?

Thanks,
Alissa

> On Jan 29, 2016, at 10:46 PM, Songhaibin (A) <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Dear Alexey and Jari,
> 
> Accept the text what Jari suggested. And now it is clear.
> 
> BR,
> -Haibin Song
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Alexey Melnikov [mailto:[email protected]]
>> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 6:36 PM
>> To: Jari Arkko; Songhaibin (A)
>> Cc: The IESG; [email protected]; [email protected];
>> [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [P2PSIP] Jari Arkko's Discuss on 
>> draft-ietf-p2psip-diagnostics-19:
>> (with DISCUSS)
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>>> On 7 Jan 2016, at 00:34, Jari Arkko <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> In Section 5.3, it says "The dMFlags field described above is a 64 bit 
>>>> field
>> that allows initiator nodes to identify up to 62 items of base information to
>> request in a request message (the first and last flags being reserved)." 62 
>> bits
>> can be used to indicate up to 62 diagnostic Kinds, but dMFlags reserves all 
>> "0"s
>> that means nothing is requested, and all "1"s that means everything is
>> requested. But at the same time, the first and last bits cannot be used for
>> other purposes.
>>> 
>>> Right. Can that be explained somewhere, and can Section 9.1 show the
>>> two aspects? That is, the all 0s/1s *and* first and last bits being
>>> reserved? The current text does not reserve the first and last bits.
>>> It only reserves the all 0s and all 1s...
>> 
>> I thought the same.
>>> 
>>>   +-------------------------+------------------------------+----------+
>>>   |  diagnostic information |diagnostic flag in dMFlags    | RFC      |
>>>   |-------------------------+------------------------------+----------|
>>>   |Reserved                 | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0000
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |STATUS_INFO              | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0001
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |ROUTING_TABLE_SIZE       | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0002
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |PROCESS_POWER            | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0004
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |UPSTREAM_BANDWIDTH       | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0008
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |DOWNSTREAM_ BANDWIDTH    | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0010
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |SOFTWARE_VERSION         | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0020
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |MACHINE_UPTIME           | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0040
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |APP_UPTIME               | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0080
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |MEMORY_FOOTPRINT         | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0100
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |DATASIZE_STORED          | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0200
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |INSTANCES_STORED         | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0400
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |MESSAGES_SENT_RCVD       | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0800
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |EWMA_BYTES_SENT          | 0x 0000 0000 0000 1000
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |EWMA_BYTES_RCVD          | 0x 0000 0000 0000 2000
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |UNDERLAY_HOP             | 0x 0000 0000 0000 4000
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |BATTERY_STATUS           | 0x 0000 0000 0000 8000
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |Reserved                 | 0x FFFF FFFF FFFF FFFF
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   +-------------------------+------------------------------+----+
>>> 
>>> But maybe I'm missing something.
>>> 
>>> I thought the text above should be something like this instead:
>> 
>> Exactly my point. If what Jari suggests is not true, then the text needs even
>> more work.
>>> 
>>>   +-------------------------+------------------------------+----------+
>>>   |  diagnostic information |diagnostic flag in dMFlags    | RFC      |
>>>   |-------------------------+------------------------------+----------|
>>>   |Reserved All 0s value   | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0000
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |Reserved First Bit    | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0001       |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |STATUS_INFO              | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0002
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |ROUTING_TABLE_SIZE       | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0004
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |PROCESS_POWER            | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0008
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |UPSTREAM_BANDWIDTH       | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0010
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |DOWNSTREAM_ BANDWIDTH    | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0020
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |SOFTWARE_VERSION         | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0040
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |MACHINE_UPTIME           | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0080
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |APP_UPTIME               | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0100
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |MEMORY_FOOTPRINT         | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0200
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |DATASIZE_STORED          | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0400
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |INSTANCES_STORED         | 0x 0000 0000 0000 0800
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |MESSAGES_SENT_RCVD       | 0x 0000 0000 0000 1000
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |EWMA_BYTES_SENT          | 0x 0000 0000 0000 2000
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |EWMA_BYTES_RCVD          | 0x 0000 0000 0000 4000
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |UNDERLAY_HOP             | 0x 0000 0000 0000 8000
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |BATTERY_STATUS           | 0x 0000 0000 0001 0000
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |Reserved Last Bit              | 0x 8000 0000 0000 0000
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   |Reserved All 1s Value       | 0x FFFF FFFF FFFF FFFF
>> |RFC-[TBDX]|
>>>   +-------------------------+------------------------------+----+
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Also, Section 5.3 uses "delimited" when it probably should have said
>>>>> "terminated", unless there's more substructure in the
>>>>> SOFTWARE_VERSION string than is identified by the text.
>>>> 
>>>> It is the language problem and accepted.
>>> 
>>> Thanks!
>>> 
>>> Jari
>>> 
> 

_______________________________________________
P2PSIP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip

Reply via email to