On April 15, 2021 at 5:55:57 AM, Peter Van der Stok wrote: Peter: Hi! I hope you're doing well! > In general, the document is well written. By looking regularly into RFC 6550, > I am rather sure that I could implement the protocol. The question remains > how this draft relates to RFC 6997. When the WG decides that this draft > replaces RFC 6997, then it would be good to copy some text from 6997 to this > draft, because RFC 6997 is more explicit about the use of RPL parameters as > specified in RFC 6550 and presents more explicit motivation. As you know, the roll WG considered the question of replacing rfc6997 as part of my AD review [1]. At the time there didn't seem to be any strong interest in doing so. Do you think that has changed? Thanks for the review! Alvaro. [1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/r3MP2MKrWqTMVmAQjKJDfU6iu-A/ -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
