Re: Bit numbering I-D nit

[Bill Studenmund <wrstuden@wasabisystems.com>]

On Wed, 20 Mar 2002, Ralph Weber wrote:

> I am getting serious flack from the Fibre Channel
> community over the bit numbering requirement
> in http://www.ietf.org/ID-nits.html.
>
> The problem is that Fibre Channel uses the
> other bit numbering scheme and interoperability
> woes seem certain unless something gets
> documented in the IETF RFCs.
>
> Everybody agrees that the body of the FC
> Frame Encapsulation and FCIP drafts can
> have the IETF bit numbering in the figures.
>
> What they all want is an appendix, or some
> such thing in the drafts/RFCs that translates
> it all back to the Fibre Channel view of
> reality.
>
> Such a thing seems destined to make waves
> in the IETF review process, and possibly
> even be a target for the RFC Editor's ax.
>
> Should I just jump of the top of the Hilton
> now, or is there a way out of this mess?

Add it as an appendix, and see what happens. Does the Fibre Channel
community have a standard dictating how they lay out bit numbers? If so,
label it a translation to that standard. :-)

Take care,

Bill