Formal Notation for RObust Header Compression (ROHC-FN)
RFC 4997

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 13 and is now closed.

Magnus Westerlund Yes

(Jari Arkko) No Objection

Comment (2007-01-11)
No email
send info
It would be useful if the document explained the level
of formality it actually provides. For instance, do we
have tools that given a formal definition, can generate
a full implementation of a compression profile? Or is
that only possible in some circumstances, or perhaps
not all? Are there checks that can be run on the
formal specification beyond satisfying syntactic
and basic semantic rules?

Note also the possibility that at least parts
of the specification can exist in natural
language only (see below) or be references
to external algorithms to computing specific

> The ROHC-FN provides a library of commonly used encoding methods.
> Encoding methods can be defined using plain English, or using a
> formal definition consisting of e.g. a collection of expressions
> (Section 4.7) and "ENFORCE" statements (Section 4.9).

(Ross Callon) No Objection

(Brian Carpenter) (was Discuss, No Objection) No Objection

Comment (2007-01-11)
No email
send info
I can't find this work anywhere in the charter or
milestones. Was there an explicit discussion whether standards
track is appropriate?

(Lisa Dusseault) No Objection

(Lars Eggert) No Objection

(Bill Fenner) No Objection

(Ted Hardie) No Objection

(Russ Housley) No Objection

(Cullen Jennings) No Objection

(David Kessens) No Objection

(Jon Peterson) No Objection

(Dan Romascanu) No Objection

(Mark Townsley) No Objection