Hello Gabriel : Yes, I implicitly support the document in WGLC. I have to raise one issue about it, that we probably have been a bit too efficient in cleaning up references to RPL in the last version to prepare for this LC. As it goes, the text in section 4.2 that mandated the way the TID is computed and incremented (lollipop and all) is now all gone, since it came from a reference to RFC6550. The text would say in 05:
" The TID essentially obeys the same rules as the Path Sequence field in the Transit Information Option (TIO) found in the RPL Destination Advertisement Object (DAO) [RFC6550<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6550>]. " This test is needed otherwise the 6LBR will not be able to compare 2 values of a TID and understand the intension of the sender WRT what's newer/older. I see 2 possibilities: - Restore the reference, so people clearly see that the TID field is meant to contain the same value / same incrementing and wrapping rules as the RPL Path Sequence - Copy the text from RFC 6550 so this document is self-contained, and leave it completely to another document to describe the optimizations that can be achieved by coupling ND and RPL. What do others think? From: Gabriel Montenegro [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: mercredi 28 juin 2017 01:10 To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: WG Last Call on draft-ietf-6lo-rfc6775-update-06 through July 11 Hi, I just initiated a WG last call on: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6lo-rfc6775-update-06 The WG last call will finish on July 11. Thanks in advance for your comments. Gabriel
_______________________________________________ 6lo mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo
