Re: [Last-Call] [6tisch] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-6tisch-enrollment-enhanced-beacon-06

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Tim Evens via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
    > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
    > Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
    > by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
    > like any other last call comments.

Thank you.

    > In section 1.2,
    > "These slots are rare, and with 10ms
    > slots, with a slot-frame length of 100, there may be only 1 slot/s
    > for the beacon."

    > IMO, this could be reworded to increase clarity. For example, "Considering 10ms
    > slots and a slot-frame length of 100, these slots are rare and could result in
    > only 1 slot for a beacon."

Reworded as you suggest:

 There is a limited number of timeslots designated as a broadcast slot by
 each
 -router in the network. These slots are rare, and with 10ms slots, with a
 slot-frame length of
 -100, there may be only 1 slot/s for the beacon.
 +router in the network. Considering 10ms slots and a slot-frame length of
 100,
 +these slots are rare and could result in only 1 slot/s for a broadcast,
 which
 +needs to be used for the beacon.  Additional broadcasts for Router
 +Advertisements, or Neighbor Discovery could even more scarce.

    > In section 1.3,
    > "At layer 3, [RFC4861] defines a mechanism by which nodes learn about
    > routers by listening for multicasted Router Advertisements (RA)."

    > Would it be possible to reword to not use "multicasted?"  For example,
    > "by receiving multicast Router Advertisements (RA)."

done.

    > "no RA is heard within a set time, then a Router Solicitation (RS) may
    > be multicast,"

    > "may be sent as multicast" might be more clear.

done.

    > In section 2,
    > "proxy priority  this field indicates the willingness fo the sender to
    > act as join proxy.  Lower value indicates greater willingness"

    > Typo "fo"

fixed.

    > IMO, it would be clearer if the field name in the protocol header
    > matches the description for it. For example, "Proxy priority (proxy prio)"

okay.

    > In Section 4,
    > "An interloper with a radio sniffer would be able to use the network
    > ID to map out the extend of the mesh network."

    > extend or extent?

extent, thank you catching that.

All this in -07 about to be published.



--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

-- 
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux