[Babel-users] Babel extension mechanism

[Gabriel Kerneis]

Hi Juliusz,

On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 06:13:05PM +0200, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
> I hope to do something with this (hopefully an experimental RFC), so
> please take the time to review it.

§1: "The basic protocol" -> "The base Babel protocol"

§2: I would rename the section into "Extensions of the Babel protocol" and
turn the introduction into a new sub-section "2.1 new versions" (and re-number
the following ones accordingly).

§2¶2: "completely incompatible" -> "non backwards-compatible"

§2.2¶1: you use "actual length", "base length" and "length" to mean the same
thing; I would pick one (preferably the first) and use it consistently.

§2.2¶3: remove "used by different extensions" (spurious and confusing; it might
be the same extension).

§2.2¶3: "for all TLVs" -> "globally"

§2.2.1: "see below" -> "see Section 2.2.2.1" (assuming no re-numbering)

§2.2.1: the top line of the packet diagram is longer than the bottom one.  I
think I understand the rationale (Length might be 1), but I still find it
confusing.

§2.2.2.2: idem.

§2.3: I find "bits with values 80 and 40 hexadecimal" a bit odd (the bits have
no value, only a position, and "hexadecimal" seems to have been added as an
after-thought), but every other proposal I could come up with was worse.  At
least yours does not suffer from bit-ordering ambiguity.  Maybe "hexadecimal
values"?

§3: "completely incompatible" -> "non backwards-compatible"

Best,
-- 
Gabriel