This email is sent as an individual contributor’s review during the WGLC.

Unsure whether sections 2.2 and 2.3 are useful here, this I-D is a simple fix 
in the existing RFC (i.e., section 3 is the core).

In section 3, I do not think that the reference to 
[I-D.ietf-6lo-prefix-registration<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-6lo-prefix-registration-10>]
 is useful or required.

Also in section 3, s/Prefix Length/PrefixLength/ when describing the fields. 
More important, I think that this field should simply be “Status” as in RFC 
8928 as this I-D updates RFC 8928.

Minor nit, but for Adnan, the header shows his affiliation as “P Bari”, which 
is rather meaningless, use “Politecnico di Bari” ?

Hope this helps

-éric

From: Shwetha <[email protected]>
Date: Tuesday, 29 April 2025 at 15:38
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Cc: Carles Gomez Montenegro <[email protected]>, 
[email protected] 
<[email protected]>
Subject: [6lo] WGLC for draft-ietf-6lo-updating-rfc-8928-01
Hi All,

This email initiates a Working Group Last Call (WGLC) for 
draft-ietf-6lo-updating-rfc-8928-01 [1]. The Last Call will run for 2 weeks, 
ending on Wednesday, May 14, 2025.

This document updates RFC 8928 [2], “Address-Protected Neighbor Discovery
for Low-Power and Lossy Networks” (AP-ND), by updating the bit
position for the C-flag and registering it with IANA.
The authors have addressed the initial set of comments received since the draft 
was adopted.

Please send your comments, feedback, and reviews to the mailing list before the 
end of the Last Call.

Thank you!
Carles and Shwetha

[1] https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-6lo-updating-rfc-8928-01.txt
[2] https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8928.txt
_______________________________________________
6lo mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to