https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-ietf-6tisch-enrollment-enhanced-beacon-08&url2=draft-ietf-6tisch-enrollment-enhanced-beacon-09

I have interspersed the security issues with each of the fields within the
description of the fields in section 2.  This avoids enumerating the fields a
second time, and is probably more in the face for implementers.
This also makes it easier to review and avoids repeating what each field is.

On the other hand, it may a poor way to present this.

I am asking for the WG's opinion on whether to do it this way, or move it all
to the Security Considerations section.

-- 
]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        |    IoT architect   [
]     [email protected]  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
6tisch mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch

Reply via email to