Subject: [Dime] Editorial Nits in draft-ietf-dime-rfc3588bis-02.txt

From: David Frascone <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 09:27:05 -0400

There are some formatting issues in draft-ietf-dime-rfc3588bis-02.txt,
possibly from tab or space conversions.  They are noticeable in
http://www.frascone.com/draft-ietf-dime-rfc3588bis-02-from-rfc3588.diff.html

Indentation Issues:
    Page 26, line 18
    Page 51, line 27
    Page 55, line 17-19
    Page 71, line 30, etc.  off by one space this time.
    Page 72, line 44
    Section 11.3
   
And, I found a few other grammatical nits:

    Page 84, "Relay agents does not require full validation of incoming
messages. At the minimum, validation of the message header and relevant
routing AVPs has to be done when relaying messages."  Should read,
"Relay agents do not require . . . "

   Page 96, should read, "To provide backward compatibility with
existing implementations that follow [RFC..."

    Section 7.1.4, Transient Failures: "Note that these errors MUST be
used in answer messages whose 'E' bit not is set." -- did you mean, "bit
is not set." ?

    Section 7.1.5: "To provide backward compatibility with existing
implementations that follows [RFC3588]" should be, "implementations that
follow" -- and, last sentence, "the error values enumerated here maybe
non-sequential."  maybe -> may be.

The definition of DIAMETER_NO_COMMON_APPLICATION 5010, does not pass my
parser, I suggest the following replacement text:

    "This error is returned when a non-relay node, supporting a specific
set of applications has an empty intersection with the set of
applications advertised by its peer."

-- 

David Frascone

            I'd love to, but I have to stay home and see if I snore

_______________________________________________
DiME mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime

---

From: Victor Fajardo <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 13:26:06 -0400

Hi David,

>     Page 71, line 30, etc.  off by one space this time.

Ok

> "Relay agents do not require . . . "

Ok

> existing implementations that follow [RFC..."

Ok

> used in answer messages whose 'E' bit not is set." -- did you mean, "bit

Ok

> non-sequential."  maybe -> may be.

Ok

> applications advertised by its peer."

If the text is too cryptic we can re-word to:

"This error is returned by a Diameter node that is not acting as a relay 
when it receives a
CER which advertises a set of applications that it does not support"

regards,
victor

---

From: David Frascone <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 13:28:49 -0400

I like yours even better.  Simpler == better :)

-Dave

Victor Fajardo wrote:
> "This error is returned by a Diameter node that is not acting as a
> relay when it receives a

-- 

David Frascone

            Back Up My Hard Drive? I Can't Find The Reverse Switch!