Dear Benoit, thanks for your comments. Please see inline our response. A new version of the draft will be published later today.
regards, X --- Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-6tisch-minimal-20: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6tisch-minimal/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- While reading, I frowned upon the same MAY & RPL issue as mentioned by Alvaro: The Introduction mentions that "RPL is specified to provide the framework for time synchronization in an 802.15.4 TSCH network.", but Section 5 (RPL Settings) makes it optional: "In a multi-hop topology, the RPL routing protocol [RFC6550] MAY be used." ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ANSWER: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The two sentences in the intro referring to RPL have been removed. We think now that entering this discussion in the intro is too early. Our goal is to support implementations that want to use RPL. In this sense, we indicate how to map the L3 topology with the L2 (and timing) topology when RPL is used. However we do not want to restrict other possible routing protocols. _______________________________________________ 6tisch mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch 2017-02-16 11:51 GMT+01:00 Benoit Claise <[email protected]>: > Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-6tisch-minimal-20: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6tisch-minimal/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > While reading, I frowned upon the same MAY & RPL issue as mentioned by > Alvaro: > The Introduction mentions that "RPL is specified to provide the framework > for time synchronization in an 802.15.4 TSCH network.", but Section 5 > (RPL Settings) makes it optional: "In a multi-hop topology, the RPL > routing protocol [RFC6550] MAY be used." > > > -- Dr. Xavier Vilajosana Wireless Networks Lab *Internet Interdisciplinary Institute (IN3)Professor* (+34) 646 633 681 [email protected] <[email protected]> http://xvilajosana.org http://wine.rdi.uoc.edu Parc Mediterrani de la Tecnologia Av Carl Friedrich Gauss 5, B3 Building 08860 Castelldefels (Barcelona). Catalonia. Spain [image: Universitat Oberta de Catalunya]
_______________________________________________ 6tisch mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch
