Dear Carles: I pushed an 06 that passes the doc to xml2rfc v3, and moves the ref to the LWIG implementation to informational. Please note that the main reason of the text about it is to indicate that it is non-compatible with this draft. For that reason it was actually strange to make it a normative reference, many thanks for spotting it..
All the best; Pascal -----Original Message----- From: Carles Gomez Montenegro <[email protected]> Sent: dimanche 20 octobre 2019 17:15 To: Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Subject: Fragment recovery, shepherd writeup: one minor point Hello Pascal, While preparing my shepherd write-up for the 6lo fragment recovery draft, I noticed one minor detail that I would like to bring to your attention. In -05, draft-ietf-lwig-6lowpan-virtual-reassembly was added as a reference. I think it is a bit odd that this document is mentioned for the first time only at the end of the Security considerations section (note that this reference is in fact a normative reference). My proposal is updating the second paragraph of Section 1, and the last paragraph of Section 2.4, so that draft-ietf-lwig-6lowpan-virtual-reassembly is also introduced there. For example, for Section 2.4, it could be something along the lines of: CURRENT: "LLN Minimal Fragment Forwarding" [I-D.ietf-6lo-minimal-fragment] introduces the concept of a Virtual Reassembly Buffer (VRB) and an associated technique to forward fragments as they come, using the datagram_tag as a label in a fashion similar to MPLS. This specification reuses that technique with slightly modified controls. NEW: "LLN Minimal Fragment Forwarding" [I-D.ietf-6lo-minimal-fragment] introduces the concept of a Virtual Reassembly Buffer (VRB) and an associated technique to forward fragments as they come, using the datagram_tag as a label in a fashion similar to MPLS. The technique is described in [I-D.ietf-lwig-6lowpan-virtual-reassembly]. This specification reuses that technique with slightly modified controls. .... and something similar might work also for Section 1. What do you think? Thanks, Carles (as the document shepherd) _______________________________________________ 6lo mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo
