Hi,

Thanks for the comments we'll update the draft as specified.
 
BR,
-- Jaime

On Feb 24, 2012, at 4:50 PM, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
> 
> Some comments:
> 
> 1. Section 4:  ".. is calculated as a SHA-1 hash..."
> 
> This is defined only for CHORD-RELOAD, other algorithms may use a different
> way of computing the Resource-ID (unless only CHORD-RELOAD can be used with
> this usage, in which case it should be explicitly stated).
> 
> Also, URIs are case insensitive, so they need to be canonicalized before been
> converted to a Resource-ID.
> 
> 
> 2. Figure 2:
> 
> Messages 4 and 5 should be AppAttach.
> 
> 200 OK has no meaning in RELOAD (messages 6 and 7).
> 
> 
> 3. Section 7, last paragraph: "The only difference is data_value..."
> 
> data_value is never used.
> 
> 
> 4. Section 7, CoAPCaching definition
> 
> The values to select coap_caching_type are never defined (coap_caching_type
> should be an enum).
> 
> 
> 5. Section 7.1 Definition of ProxyCache, SensorEntry
> 
> [] should be redefined to carry the length (<0..length>)
> 
> 
> 6. Section 7.1 Definition of SensorEntry
> 
> [] should be redefined to carry the length (<0..length>)
> 
> "opaque coap_uri;" should define a length (e.g. opaque coap_uri<0..2^16-1>)
> 
> 
> 7. Section 7.2 Definition of SensorCache
> 
> [] should be redefined to carry the length (<0..length>)
> 
> 
> 8. Section 7.2 "last_awake" definition
> 
> Perhaps it's simpler to use the same format than RELOAD to store time, i.e.
> milliseconds since the epoch.
> 
> 
> 9. Section 7.2 Definition of SensorValue
> 
> "value" should be redefined as having a length.
> 
> 
> 10. Section 7.2 "measurement_time" definition
> 
> Unit is not defined.
> 
> 
> 11. Section 7.2 "lifetime" definition
> 
> Unit is not defined.
> 
> 
> 12. Section 8.1 "...which contains a Node-ID..."
> 
> CoAPRegistration does not contain a Node-ID.
> 
> 
> 13. Section 8.1 URI-NODE-MATCH
> 
> This is a new access control policy, so it needs to be defined.
> 
> 
> 14. Section 8.1 Definition of CoAPRegistration
> 
> Because of the fact that some RELOAD client may not be directly routable
> (second bullet of RELOAD section 3.2.1), I would add a "Destination
> destination_list<0..2^16-1>;" field.
> 
> 
> 15. Section 8.1 Definition of CoAPRegistration
> 
> The () notation for coap_uris is not defined, but the two lines can be
> replaced by this:
> 
> opaque coap_uris<0..2^16-1>;
> 
> There is no explanation on the internal format of coap_uris, for example that
> the uris must be separated (or terminated?) with ";".
> 
> 
> 16. Section 8.2 "which contains a Node-ID..."
> 
> CoAPCaching does not contain a Node-ID (ProxyCache does).
> 
> 
> 17. Section 8.2 URI-MATCH
> 
> This is a new access control policy, so it needs to be defined.
> 
> 
> Nits
> - ----
> 
> - - Section 4:
> 
> s/registering register/registering/
> s/RESOURCE-ID/Resource-ID/
> 
> - - Section 5:
> 
> s/RESOURCE-ID/Resource-ID/
> 
> - - Section 7.2:
> 
> s/NodeID/Node-ID/
> 
> 
> On 02/24/2012 03:01 AM, Jaime Jiménez J wrote:
>> Hello,
>> 
>> we just submitted a draft to the p2psip WG that proposes a CoAP Usage for
>> RELOAD.
>> 
>> Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) is a specialized web transfer
>> protocol. It realizes the Representational State Transfer (REST)
>> architecture for the most constrained nodes, such as sensorsand actuators.
>> 
>> 
>> The CoAP Usageprovides the functionality to federate Wireless Sensor
>> Networks (WSN)in a peer-to-peer fashion.  It also provides a rendezvous
>> service for CoAP Nodes and caching of sensor information.
>> 
>> http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload-00.txt
> 
> - -- 
> Marc Petit-Huguenin
> Personal email: [email protected]
> Professional email: [email protected]
> Blog: http://blog.marc.petit-huguenin.org
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
> 
> iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJPR6OiAAoJECnERZXWan7E/g4P/16gfK4nFltd97CIvnR8zipo
> 4LzC8GdzBSokZRv0el3UPzrUUCyBi03jWKvhegwstMAKJfk+S2h7hGp0BP+mC4Db
> EESrZ9BBfv/6qbW0RJUYrkFzMBUN6EuYc4p+5zs0JpKIqisev/dEI6D6e5oYIKOy
> Hy4v7NRXdK6lwnPgIknNsdbaM91+MMFHoCcXrcvlVdoHDGDPyae3q4JjZtwpOHaG
> FDESCxI/Za9v0eCCgBVG6MFMn7fL5gIc7WlQD7i72f9IIMfs55i3ttA/dMz/Lxcv
> RdctpPCOXk6zrMk+rAQnrePgubUNjU4qd9gm7Ef8BuB4Z8yt8yKrNV4WEerBZ3Fr
> PN6XCdMkwfYcj/74mVV0jlfC/xUJyTlZ8pQbspz7YcVgr/OCJjwts8RPULWCvT6X
> qR6rGdwSd+CaTkLfXxqg6WjT5x5pIGkpemJP5cpNJh3InqsgNQ1rVSa7qrkNCYUG
> aW6IoMKH+jSaTHlyC20TleCWRJpdPkliKu1q5PT8vbDXWzl3riU6D8oQGUXUB1ca
> PTE4FWXvjdWTfrhmgmZL6a1+rVKqgB2eWdh+o8HRweWxTDnvVmqIf+R1bseKRpHh
> ItHeWENs0psGVggc0/u/hHfKvNW7Usf0Z92NnqWNnYvvbSzH6z1+Z2mYAfwtvCyF
> en8J08gcGH17NJ8tdUyw
> =egUL
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
P2PSIP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip

Reply via email to