Dear Alvaro, we published a new versoin of the draft covering the responses to your questions as detailed in the answers provided in the last emails.
thanks for your reviews. Xavi 2018-04-05 11:32 GMT+02:00 Xavi Vilajosana Guillen <xvilajos...@uoc.edu>: > Dear Alvaro, > > thanks so much for your comments and reviews. Find inline the responses to > your comments (prepended with XV:). > The proposed modifications will be published in a new version of the draft > covering all received reviews. > > > 2018-04-03 10:18 GMT+02:00 Alvaro Retana <aretana.i...@gmail.com>: > >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> COMMENT: >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >>> (1) S3.2.2: "The value of SeqNum MUST be different at each new 6P Request >> >> issued to the same neighbor." Should that be "...different...to the same >> >> neighbor and SF"? S3.4.6 talks about maintaining independent SeqNums per >> >> neighbor, per SF. >> >> >>> > >> XV: Yes should be different per neighbor and SF. The text will be updated >>> to say that as follow: >> >> " The value of SeqNum MUST be different at each new 6P Request issued to >>> the same neighbor and using the same SF." >> >> >>> > >> >>> (2) S3.2.3: "The SF MAY redefine the format and meaning of the >>> CellOptions >> >> field." If the "RECOMMENDED" values are expected to be the default, how >>> are >> >> changes to the formatting/meaning communicated between A and B? >> >> >>> > >> XV: The SF is the user of that placeholders. If both sides implement the >>> SF both sides will understand the >> >> new definition. >> >> >>> > >> (3) S3.2.4: "The CellList is an opaque set of bytes, sent unmodified to >>> the >> >> SF." Given that A and B don't really know what the contents of the >>> CellList >> >> are, or even if the "RECOMMENDED format" is followed, I don't see the >>> need to >> >> Normatively define the Cell Format. IOW, s/RECOMMENDED/recommended >> >> >>> > >> XV: As per another review, we removed the term recommended and used the >>> term default format. >> >> In this manner we suggest a format that may be the generally used but it >>> can be changed >> >> if an SF needs so. >> >> >> > thanks again for your kind review. > Xavi > > >> _______________________________________________ >> 6tisch mailing list >> 6tisch@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch >> > > > > -- > Dr. Xavier Vilajosana > Wireless Networks Lab > > *Internet Interdisciplinary Institute (IN3)Professor* > (+34) 646 633 681 > xvilajos...@uoc.edu <usu...@uoc.edu> > http://xvilajosana.org > http://wine.rdi.uoc.edu > Parc Mediterrani de la Tecnologia > Av Carl Friedrich Gauss 5, B3 Building > <https://maps.google.com/?q=Av+Carl+Friedrich+Gauss+5,+B3+Building+08860+Castelldefels+(Barcelona).+Catalonia.+Spain&entry=gmail&source=g> > 08860 Castelldefels (Barcelona). Catalonia. Spain > <https://maps.google.com/?q=Av+Carl+Friedrich+Gauss+5,+B3+Building+08860+Castelldefels+(Barcelona).+Catalonia.+Spain&entry=gmail&source=g> > [image: Universitat Oberta de Catalunya] > > -- Dr. Xavier Vilajosana Wireless Networks Lab *Internet Interdisciplinary Institute (IN3)Professor* (+34) 646 633 681 xvilajos...@uoc.edu <usu...@uoc.edu> 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 6tisch@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch
