Hi SM, I responded inline to your latest comments, below, where I took additional action.
Thanks, Tony On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 4:33 AM, SM <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Anthony, > > At 17:00 12-02-2013, Anthony Mancuso wrote: > >> In Section 1.1: >> >> "Academia and Industry have studied multiple cognitive radio [2] >> mechanisms for use in such a scenario." >> >> The reference seemed odd. It took me some time to understand that it was >> put in to address a comment. However, the first (external) reference that >> defines that is a 404. >> >> TODO(amancuso): fix link >> > > Ok. > I think the MUST below is one of the two boilerplate words you had a >> comment on. Is there another? >> > > See the section after the Abstract and Section 2.1. TM: Now i see the two. I removed the second (redundant) RFC 2119 wording and reference. > > > In response to earlier comments, this section was reworded and "MUST" >> changed to "must". I assume this is what you were questioning. >> > > Ok. > > > ---- >> >> In Section 4.2: >> >> "A simplified operation scenario of offloading content, such as video >> stream, from the a metered Internet connection to the a WS connection >> consists of the following steps:" >> >> What is a metered Internet connection? >> ---- >> Usage is monitored (metered) and paid for. I rephrased to clarify: "more >> congested or costly Internet connection, such as a metered >> (fee-based-on-usage) wire, wireless, or satellite service." >> > > In my opinion you don't really have to get into all that. I'll defer to > the author. TM: Agreed. Simply referred to the "metered" Internet service as a paid service. > > > cleaned up protocol and operational requirements in response to earlier >> comments. This is a good example of a use case, but didn't fit comfortably >> as a P or O requirement, and was deleted from requirements sections. >> > > Ok. > > > White Space Database (used to be defined in terminology). Changed it >> simply to "database". >> > > Ok. > > > This is a rather large container of worms. We kicked it around for about >> a half-hour and concluded that since this doc is for the Internet >> Engineering Task Force, most readers will understand (and forgive). >> Nonetheless, this is a good point, so I generalized it as follows (while >> retaining the commonly used (and loosely-understood) term: "The database >> and the master device MUST be connected (e.g., through the Internet)." >> > > I agree about that container. :-) The draft is trying to convince me that > white space is better for the Internet connection (see my previous comment > about metered). The requirements is about a protocol to Access Spectrum > Database. IP connectivity is a lower-layer issue. I am ok with the above > text. > > > This section only intends to state the general requirement. It is my >> understanding that the current draft of the protocol specification >> specifies JSON encoding of location parameters that is compatible with >> GEOPRIV. >> > > Ok. > > Regards, > -sm >
