RObust Header Compression (ROHC): Profiles for User Datagram Protocol (UDP) Lite
RFC 4019

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 04 and is now closed.

(Allison Mankin) Yes

(Harald Alvestrand) No Objection

Comment (2004-09-02)
No email
send info
Reviewed by Brian Carpenter, Gen-ART

He observed the same problem as others; in his words:

It was kind of hard to review since its primary reference (to UDP-Lite)
is wrongly referenced in the text - it's not [1] but [4], and I don't know
where to look for RFCUUUU which is the citation behind [4].

OK, a little research tells me they are referring to RFC 3828.

(Steven Bellovin) No Objection

Comment (2004-08-30)
No email
send info
RFC 3828 should appear as a normative reference.  The reference given in 
paragraph 3 of Section 1 is to 2119 instead, which is wrong.  (this 
should probably be in an RFC Editor's note.)

(Margaret Cullen) No Objection

(Bill Fenner) No Objection

(Ted Hardie) No Objection

Comment (2004-08-31)
No email
send info
In Section 5.6, the draft says:

   Upon receiving the Mode parameter set to '0', the decompressor MUST
   stay in its current mode of operation and SHOULD refrain from sending
   further mode transition requests for the declined mode for a certain
   amount of time.

How is "certain amount of time" determined?  If the advice is in some 
other document, a pointer would be valuable.  If it is implementation
dependent, then some minimum seems required (as otherwise the SHOULD
refrain is meaningless--an implementation could refrain a clock cycle
and be compliant).

(Scott Hollenbeck) No Objection

Comment (2004-08-30)
No email
send info
Do we really want to remove the text from the IANA Considerations section as described in the document?  Sometimes that kind of explanation is helpful to have around in the future.

(Russ Housley) No Objection

(David Kessens) No Objection

(Thomas Narten) No Objection

(Jon Peterson) No Objection

(Bert Wijnen) No Objection

(Alex Zinin) No Objection