I agree with Lucas here. If the authors are in the process of writing separate drafts for how to encode this in COAP, QUIC, and TCP - then adding informational references to those drafts in an example section sounds like a good plan, but showing how to use specific bits in this draft (even in an appendix) without actually registering them will likely lead to confusion.
David On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 10:25 AM Lucas Pardue <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Nilo, > > On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 6:11 PM Nilo Massimo <massimo.nilo= > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> first of all thanks for the many comments received. >> >> As jointly agreed at the time with the chairs of the IPPM, QUIC and TSWG >> WGs, this draft is general and its purpose is to describe only the >> measurement methodologies in a protocol independent way. In order to >> describe their application to a certain protocol, it was agreed to present >> a specific draft in the related WG. >> >> So to give an example, with regard to the COAP protocol, this was done by >> submitting a draft in the CORE WG. See >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-core-coap-pm/ >> >> Therefore, with regard to the QUIC protocol, we will prepare a draft to >> be presented in the QUIC WG which will address the issues highlighted in >> this thread and details related to the possible future implementation. >> >> >> >> As for this draft >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ippm-explicit-flow-measurements >> , we will write a new version of it where the section 6 will be placed in a >> draft appendix and renamed to Experimental Examples. >> >> In this way (we hope) it will be clear that we are talking about >> experiments made, and that they must not be interpreted as implementation. >> >> >> >> If the other co-authors agree, we can proceed to make a new version of >> the draft. >> > > Given that section 6 just seems to be a trivial presentation of how to > assign bits in QUIC's 7 bit space, I don't really see what the value of > talking about any specifics are. What benefit would the authors see in > keeping an appendix? > > Cheers > Lucas >
