Hi Adnan, > On Jun 2, 2025, at 2:09 PM, Adnan Rashid <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear Mahesh, > > Thanks for the time and effort you put in > > my comments are inline > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > It is unusual, but I find this statement under the ballot text. > > "This document has not completed IETF Last Call. Please do not issue the > ballot > early without good reason. > > This document is in an IESG state of "In Last Call". It would be unexpected to > issue a ballot while in this state". > > I know the document is short, and is a quick fix, but is this expected? > > @Eric Vyncke <mailto:[email protected]> please have a look > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > NIT > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > All comments below are about very minor potential issues that you may choose > to > address in some way - or ignore - as you see fit. Some were flagged by > automated tools (via > https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Flarseggert%2Fietf-reviewtool&data=05%7C02%7Cadnan.rashid%40poliba.it%7C0ef6fba43349423ae40708dda14c628a%7C5b406aaba1f14f13a7aadd573da3d332%7C0%7C0%7C638844071630170054%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=a4vHUmqePiD932mwZbDxTB98PPRQ%2FQOyNZGqzjYOy5Q%3D&reserved=0) > <https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool>, so there > will likely be some false positives. There is no need to let me know what you > did with these suggestions. > > Section 2.2, paragraph 0 > > This document uses terms and concepts that are discussed in Neighbor > > Discovery (ND) for IPv6 [RFC4861], [RFC4862] and Subnet ND [RFC6775], > > [RFC8505] [RFC8928], [RFC8929] [RFC9685], and > > [I-D.ietf-6lo-prefix-registration]. > > > One too many ands in the statement. Maybe: > s/[RFC4682] and Subnet ND/[RFC4682], Subnet ND/ > > Its RFC4862. Yes you are right that sentence was not in a correct form. > I changed like this > > This document uses terms and concepts that are discussed in > IPv6-Neighbor Discovery (ND) [RFC4861], [RFC4862], as well as > 6LoWPAN-ND [RFC6775], [RFC8505] [RFC8928], [RFC8929] [RFC9685], and > [I-D.ietf-6lo-prefix-registration].
Ack. > > > Reference entries duplicated in both normative and informative sections: > [RFC8929]. > > I am unable to find any duplication. May be you are confused/github tool with > RFC8929 and RFC8928. > > Uncited references: [RFC4861], [RFC6775], [RFC4862], and [RFC8929]. > > As noted in your earlier comment, these references are cited in Section 2.2. > Since they are not required elsewhere in the document. Could be, but as the disclaimer states above, the tool can give false positives. Either ways, it is a non-blocking comment. > > > > > Informativa Privacy - Ai sensi del Regolamento (UE) 2016/679 si precisa che > le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio sono riservate e ad uso > esclusivo del destinatario. Qualora il messaggio in parola Le fosse pervenuto > per errore, La preghiamo di eliminarlo senza copiarlo e di non inoltrarlo a > terzi, dandocene gentilmente comunicazione. Grazie. Privacy Information - > This message, for the Regulation (UE) 2016/679, may contain confidential > and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to > receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose or take any > action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received > this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail > and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. Mahesh Jethanandani [email protected]
_______________________________________________ 6lo mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
