Xavier Vilajosana writes: > Yes we are refering to the 2nd last line of table 2.a. > > Most of us know that you are right and what you are indicting makes > sense. However vendors have already implemented or are implementing > what an standard document says (w.r.t table 2.a).
Are you sure about that? I.e. have you verified this from the vendors themselves? I mean, if they do implement this, then there is no way to provide both PAN IDs for frame version 0b10 frames, and that means this feature is not available for 802.15.4 at all. > At this point and understanding that we had some consensus on only > citing work that is already published as standard we need to refer > to table 2.a as it is now (in the 2012 version). It would be better to verify this from the actual vendors implementing this, and not to get fixated with the table 2.a... > This is strange but if we adopt the changes proposed in some of this > mentor documents, how do we ensure that everybody that has > implemented or is implementing 15.4e (2012) will follow this > amendments which are not part of any standard yet. If I have understood correctly the document in mentor is trying to reflect what vendors have implemented, i.e. what 802.15.4e was supposed to say, and how it was implemented, not necessarely what was written in 802.15.4e... As this is confusing issue, it would be best to poll some vendors and ask what they actually have implemented and specify that for our draft. This draft is the one that is used for the testing, so for that they should implement what is said here. On the other hand if vendors have ignored the table 2a in the 4e and instead implemented things differently, it would be annoying to require them to change their implementations just for the minimal testing, even when we are following what 4e says... > What others think, does anybody have experience on such situations? I would suggest that those who are planning to participate in testing to check their implementations and verify what they do and change the draft to reflect that (provided there is one common way). If different vendors have implemented this differently, then this question gets bit harder to solve. -- [email protected] _______________________________________________ 6tisch mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch
