Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-6lo-paging-dispatch-04: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6lo-paging-dispatch/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I found this text A Page (say Page N) is said to be active once the Page N Paging Dispatch is parsed, and as long as no other Paging Dispatch is parsed. somewhat unclear. Is it saying A Page (say Page N) is said to be active once the Page N Paging Dispatch is parsed, and remains active until another Paging Dispatch is parsed. ? I wasn't quite sure what "so far" meant in this text (and temporal references in RFCs that live forever are somewhat confusing, anyway). As a result, there is no need so far for restoring the Page 0 parsing context after a context was switched to Page 1, so the value for the Page 0 Paging Dispatch of 11110000 may not actually occur in those packets that adhere to 6LoWPAN specifications available at the time of writing this specification. Would this be just as correct with "so far" deleted, or am I not understanding the point you're making? Thanks for explaining why you're choosing "Specification Required" as your IANA policy. _______________________________________________ 6lo mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo
