Hi Pete, for your Minor Issue: > -----Original Message----- > From: ippm [mailto:ippm-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pete Resnick > Sent: Monday, April 16, 2018 12:02 PM .... > Minor issues: > > In the paragraph after Figure 3, it says, "and subsequent values are > monotonically increasing". I'm not sure I understand what that means. If 0 is > the highest priority, then 1 is a *lower* priority than 0, not an increasing > priority. If you are trying to say that the numeric value of the priority field > is increasing by 1 for each subsequent value, then "monotonically increasing" > is wrong; the sequence "0 2 5 36" is monotonically increasing. You'd say > instead, "and subsequent values increase by one". If all you mean is that > values start at 0 and go up from there, I think you should just delete the > entire phrase; it doesn't add anything and strikes me as confusing. > [acm] I seem to recollect that we arrived at this sentence after explaining the inverse relationship between values and priorities along the way. Surely, someone has done this before, and co-authors welcome other concise text suggestions. OLD The client container holds a list (mode-preference-chain) which specifies the Mode values according to their preferred order of use by the operator of this Control-Client, including the authentication and encryption Modes. Specifically, mode-preference-chain lists the mode and its corresponding priority, expressed as a 16-bit unsigned integer, where zero is the highest priority and subsequent values are monotonically increasing. NEW The client container holds a list (mode-preference-chain) which specifies the Mode values according to their preferred order of use by the operator of this Control-Client, including the authentication and encryption Modes. Specifically, mode-preference-chain lists the mode and its corresponding priority, expressed as a 16-bit unsigned integer, where zero is the highest priority and subsequent integers increase by one. Does that do it? Al
