Hi Megan; I do 100% agree with Ralph here. I'd prefer that we make that change before publish. Apart from that, I'm perfectly happy with the text as it stands.
Cheers, Pascal > -----Original Message----- > From: Ralph Droms (rdroms) > Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 8:15 PM > To: Pascal Thubert (pthubert) > Cc: Ralph Droms (rdroms); Megan Ferguson; Carsten Bormann; 6lowpan; RFC > Editor; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [6lowpan] [ADs] AUTH48 [MF]: RFC 6282 <draft-ietf-6lowpan-hc- > 15.txt> > > Following up on Pascal's observation, I looked through the entire doc for > occurrences of "6lopwan". In my opinion, all of those occurrences could be > replaced with "IEEE802.15.4-based network"; in some cases s/the > 6lowpan/an IEEE802.15.4-based network/ In either case, note the lower- > case "network". > > Not meaning to delay the publication process further, but I think we should > take a second to consider consistency... > > - Ralph > > On Aug 9, 2011, at 1:04 PM 8/9/11, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) wrote: > > > Hello Megan > > > > I think that for consistency: > > > > LOWPAN_HC1 and LOWPAN_HC2 are insufficient for most practical uses > of > > IPv6 in 6LoWPANs. LOWPAN_HC1 is most effective for link-local > > > > Should also become > > > > LOWPAN_HC1 and LOWPAN_HC2 are insufficient for most practical uses > of > > IPv6 in IEEE 802.15.4-Based Networks. LOWPAN_HC1 is most effective > > for link-local > > > > Don't you think? > > > > Pascal > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Megan Ferguson [mailto:[email protected]] > >> Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 5:02 PM > >> To: Carsten Bormann; Ralph Droms (rdroms); Pascal Thubert (pthubert) > >> Cc: 6lowpan; RFC Editor; [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: [6lowpan] [ADs] AUTH48 [MF]: RFC 6282 > > <draft-ietf-6lowpan-hc- > >> 15.txt> > >> > >> Carsten, Pascal, and *ADs, > >> > >> Thank you for your reply. We have updated the title as requested. > > Please > >> note that we have also updated the expansion of 6LoWPAN (in the text) > > to > >> match that in the title of RFC 4919. Additionally, we have updated > > the short > >> title that appears in the running header of the document (this is best > >> reviewed in the text file below). Please review and approve these > > updates > >> or let us know if a different approach in either of these additional > > updates > >> would be preferable. > >> > >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc6282-lastdiff.html > >> > >> The text, XML, and comprehensive diff files are viewable at: > >> > >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc6282.txt > >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc6282.xml > >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc6282-diff.html > >> > >> Note that it may be necessary for you to refresh your browser to view > >> the most recent version of the document. Please review the document > >> carefully to ensure satisfaction as we do not make changes once the > >> document has been published as an RFC. > >> > >> Upon careful review, please contact us with any further updates or > > with > >> your approval of the document in its current form. > >> > >> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: > >> > >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc6282 > >> > >> Thank you. > >> > >> RFC Editor/mf > >> > >> On Aug 8, 2011, at 1:44 PM, Carsten Bormann wrote: > >> > >>> OK, I have reread all the messages, and I'm now ready to declare a > > (rough) > >> consensus for > >>> > >>> Compression Format for IPv6 Datagrams over IEEE 802.15.4-based > >> Networks > >>> > >>> (with an ever so slight edge for the -based, which is different from > > RFC > >> 4944, but "Datagrams" is different, too). > >>> > >>> While there were a number of voices for keeping 6LoWPAN in the title > > (as > >> in RFC 4919), there did not seem to be consensus for that. > >>> > >>> I apologize for holding up this RFC for so long for what is pretty > > much a > >> bikeshed color issue. > >>> > >>> And, yes, I'm slowly getting back to IETF work, and will try to > > start popping > >> the stack. > >>> > >>> Gruesse, Carsten > >>> > > _______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
