Hello Mirja:

Thanks a bunch for your review! Let's see below:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: 6lo <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Mirja Kühlewind
> Sent: mercredi 4 avril 2018 14:42
> To: The IESG <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; draft-ietf-6lo-
> [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: [6lo] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on 
> draft-ietf-6lo-rfc6775-update-
> 17: (with COMMENT)
> 
> Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-6lo-rfc6775-update-17: 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-rfc6775-update/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> I believe this document would have been easier to read for me if section 6
> would have been before section 4; however, I guess that's a matter of taste.
[PT>] You made me think. Some text is in place for historic reasons but 
overgrew over time.
Section 5 was really about updating RFC 7400. 
After a suggested renaming, I found it made more sense to move it in the 
backward compatibility section.
Then I looked at section 6 and found no objection moving it up. If that makes 
life easier for the reader, so be it : )
One thing leading to another I found some duplication between ex section 5 and 
6 that I eliminated with a minimum restructuring.
I hope the result is more readable :)
> 
> On the TID in section 6.1: Should this field be zero if the T flag is not set?
> I guess you should at least say that the field should be ignored if the T 
> flag is
> not set.
> 

[PT>] Sure, I added that text there and in the EARO section as well. It is all 
now section 4.

Many thanks!

Take care,

Pascal

> _______________________________________________
> 6lo mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo
_______________________________________________
6lo mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo

Reply via email to