Hello Michael A great many thanks.
DetNet architecture can be a normative ref no problem there. We are concluding the WGLC changes in parallel, both docs will ship at roughly the same time. I’ll act on all this today. I’ll be in a plane so I may not be able to push the result till your afternoon. If you change the xml please avoid the impacted areas till I do. All the best! Pascal > Le 14 déc. 2018 à 00:54, Michael Richardson <[email protected]> a écrit : > > > {I did a bunch of comments a few weeks ago on my phone, but it's > a mess, and it lost a bunch of notes and I'm having to partially start over > again} > > This is a summary of the changes I've suggested and/or committed: > > 1) ietf-detnet-use-cases is mentioned three times. > ietf-detnet-architecture is mentioned ten times. > They are Informational references. > I knew that things were related, but I didn't know that so much had > moved! Since detnet-use-cases and detnet-architecture are in the IESG > queue, I think that maybe some could be a normative reference if > desired. I don't feel strongly here. > I have only scanned the ToC of the use-cases document and architecture. > If it's really informative, then that's all I should need to do, > right? > > 2) I don't like this sentence: > > In order to enable the convergence of IT and OT in LLN environments, > 6TiSCH ports the IETF suite of protocols that are defined for such > environments over the TSCH MAC. > > I have suggested: > > In order to enable the convergence of IT and OT in LLN environments, > 6TiSCH suports a subset of the IETF suite of protocols (IP) over the > TSCH MAC. > > I've inserted "subset" to imply that one doesn't have to implement all the > protocols. Some might think they need to fit "finger" into their mote... > > 3) is: "domotics" a word I don't know, or a typo? > (section 1, last paragraph) > > 4) I fixed reference for IE registry to RFC8137. > 5) I found the reference to "RPL applicability in industrial networks" > a poor reference. The 6tisch WG replaces that document, and so I think > that we don't need further back references. > There is a second reference about cranes in section 3.2, which I think we > can live without. > > 6) I'd sure like to reference useofrplinfo in section 3.1, after: > "Header (SRH) in non-storing mode" + as explained in useofrplinfo.. > but that would be a normative reference to a document that I can't > promise will get to the IESG publication queue soon. Would this MISSREF > be acceptable? > > I am continuing to read/edit-for-grammar, but I thought I'd send this email > to gather some feedback. > > -- > Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works > -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- > > > > _______________________________________________ > 6tisch mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch _______________________________________________ 6tisch mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch
