Re: WG Last Call on SUA Implementors Guide completes

Lyndon,

Do you think that this document received any serious review?  I doubt
that even the editor read through it.

Quoted below is Section 2.7 from the document:

" 2.7  Parameters should only occur once in a message
" 
" 2.7.1  Description of the problem
" 
"    Parameters in SUA messages can be repeated as many times as possible.
"    This would lead to inconsistencies, such as 2 or more destination
"    addresses.
" 
" 2.7.2  Text changes to the document
" 
"    ---------
"    Old text: (Section x.x)
"    ---------
" 
" 
"    ---------
"    New text: (Section x.x)
"    ---------
" 
" 2.7.3  Solution description
" 
"    Unless explicitly stated or shown in a message format diagram, only
"    one parameter of the same type is allowed in a message.

--brian

Lyndon Ong wrote:                             (Mon, 11 Dec 2006 19:55:10)
> Hi Brian,
> 
> I take it you must have missed the WG Last Call announcement!  In any
> case, we
> should take a look at your comments.  More detail would probably be
> helpful.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Lyndon 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian F. G. Bidulock [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Monday, December 11, 2006 11:44 AM
> To: Ong, Lyndon
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Sigtran] WG Last Call on SUA Implementors Guide completes
> 
> Lyndon,
> 
> I do not agree that the document has had sufficient review for it to
> advance.
> 
> Scanning backwards through the document:
> 
> Section 2.14 needs more work.  Section 2.12 is very inconsistent with
> M3UA.  Sections 2.8, 2.9 and 2.10 do not address the comments on the
> mailing list.  Section 2.7 is incomplete (the old and new text sections
> are completely incomplete).  Section 2.6 should remove the useless text
> (nowhere is a "response" defined).  Section 2.4 needs more work to be
> consistent with the necessary order arrived at for M3UA.  Section 2.3
> introduces an incompatiblity with existing implementations.  Section 2.2
> needs more work: ANSI does not use
> 4 congestion levels for SCCP related SCON messages.
> 
> --brian
> 
> Lyndon Ong wrote:                                                  (Mon,
> 11 Dec 2006 12:26:11)
> > 
> >    Hi Folks,
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >    As there were no comments on the SUA Implementors Guide during
> > 
> >    Last  Call,  I  will  notify  our  A-Ds that this is ready for them
> to
> >    review.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >    Cheers,
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >    L. Ong
> 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sigtran mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran
> 
> 
> --
> Brian F. G. Bidulock
> [email protected]
> http://www.openss7.org/

-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock
[email protected]
http://www.openss7.org/