Dear Benjamin Many thanks for your review this time again!
I answered the track question separately (with you and Mirja), this is a conscious discussion that was debated with Suresh in Singapore, we decided for STD track and made the changes accordingly. Let's address the DISCUSS first, more tomorrow on the COMMENTs > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > DISCUSS: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I think we need to be more explicit (whether inline or by reference) about > what "Secure joining and the Link-Layer security that it sets up" > (Section 7) entails in terms of ensuring that access to the LLN is only > available > to authenticated and authorized entities. It might be worth doing so as > explicit assumptions or an applicability statement early in the document > (e.g., the Introduction). For one thing, in https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-6lo-minimal-fragment-05.txt text was moved that makes this unreadable. Changed the first paragraph of the intro to: " The original 6LoWPAN fragmentation is defined in [RFC4944] for use over a single Layer 3 hop, though possibly multiple Layer 2 hops in a mesh-under network, and was not modified by the [RFC6282] update. 6LoWPAN operations including fragmentation depend on a Link-Layer security that prevents any rogue access to the network. " > > Also, in Section 2.3 we refer to the datagram_tag plus layer-2 sender address > as being "a globally unique identifier for the datagram", but I think this can > only hold within some time-bounded window (e.g., the lifetime of the > packet), since the tag space is finite and reuse somewhat inevitable. This is certainly correct was better make it explicit. What about: " datagram_tag: An identifier of a datagram that is locally unique to the Layer 2 sender. Associated with the MAC address of the sender, this becomes a globally unique identifier for the datagram within the duration of its transmission. " Please let me know if that addresses your DISCUSS so I can move on with the COMMENTS Many thanks again! Pascal _______________________________________________ 6lo mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo
