Hello Dave

Le 13 nov. 2019 à 09:02, Dave Thaler <[email protected]> a écrit :


Pascal wrote:
[…]

   of the destination.  Upon a first fragment, a node creates a state
   and forwards the fragment.

I’d recommend “a node *attempts to* create state and forward the fragment”,
since either of those could potentially fail, right?

Also should this use normative language (“a node MUST…”)?

The state is then used to forward the
   next fragments of the datagram.



Ø  I’d suggest MAY attempt to create the state and if successful MUST use it to 
forward the next fragments.

To me, that sounds like an inappropriate use of MAY.  MAY means an implementer 
can choose to ignore it.
Do you really mean that an implementer can choose NOT to attempt to create the 
state?
If it doesn’t implement attempting to create the state, then how could the 
mechanism work at all?


I intended the MAY to indicate that the FF mechanism is optional. The node can 
always do what it did so far and either recompose the full packet to forward it 
or drop the packet for reasons of its own.

It could split in 2 sentences; say that the mechanism is OPTIONAL and then that 
when it is used the node MUST attempt to create the state; would that clarify ?


[..]


Ø  I hope you’ll be able to attend 6lo. We need to clarify the goal of the 
draft and the target info vs. std track.

I just checked the schedule, and I yes can attend 6lo now.
(I think there was a conflict in the draft agenda that is no longer present in 
the final agenda.)


Great !

Pascal

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

Reply via email to