Reviewer: Carles Gomez Review result: Ready with Issues Thanks to the authors for writing this document.
I did not identify technical problems. (There are comments below that do have a technical side, but the issues might just be editorial.) There is a number of suggestions provided below, mostly editorial and about presentation. Title - "IEEE802.15.4" --> "IEEE 802.15.4" - "Informational Element" --> "Information Element" - "6tisch" --> "6TiSCH" Abstract: I'd suggest adding a comma after "In TSCH mode of IEEE STD 802.15.4". Section 1. - "As further details" --> "As further detailed" - Introduce the acronym "EB" the first time that "Enhanced Beacon" appears. (Then use "EB" thereafter in the document.) Subsection 1.2. - After "synchronization of ASN and Join Metric," perhaps you may insert "carrying" and reorganize a bit the rest of the sentence. - "existance" --> "existence" - "There are a limited number...". --> "There is a limited number..." - "... by each router". Perhaps, to give more context, "by each router in the network". Subsection 1.3. - Title: please add ":" after "synchronization". - Title: capitalize "solicitations" and "advertisements" - On the first use of RS, RA, NS and NA, please use the expanded form and introduce the acronym, and use the acronym thereafter. - "consuming a broadcast aloha slot with unencrypted traffic" appears to be one of the reasons mentioned, but it is a bit hidden between parenthesis. You may want to reorganize the sentence to emphasize that this is actually the crucial point. - Second bullet in the list: did you mean "RA" instead of "Router Soliciation" - Third bullet in the list: "If it must listen for a RS as well..." Did you mean "listen for an RA" ? - It might be nice to close Section 1 by adding something along the lines of "This document defines...". However, this would not be specific to subsection 1.3. Therefore, some reorganization of Section 1 might improve the document. Section 2. - Even if there is a single figure in the whole document, it might be good to add a figure number and a caption the format for the new IE subtype. - After the figure, is there a particular reason why the fields of the format are presented in a different order from the one in the format? - Please add a ":" after the name of each field and its definition/description. - "this field indicates the willingness to act as join proxy". Perhaps "the willingness of the sender to act..."? - "Lower value indicates willing to act as a Join Proxy..." Perhaps "Lower value indicates greater willingness to act as..." - "Values range 0 (most willing)..." --> "Values range 0x00 (most willing)..." - In the figure, one field is called "Join Proxy lower-64". In the text, it has a different name... - "if the Proxy Address P-flag is set, then the lower 64-bits of the Join Proxy’s Link Layer address..." Did you mean "link-local" instead of "Link Layer? - "the layer-2 address of any IPv6 traffic to the originator". Did you mean "the destination layer-2 address..." ? - "if the P bit is set, then 64 bits (8 bytes) of address are present." I had trouble understanding this sentence. Please consider rewriting it. - "this is an variable length field" --> "this is a variable length field". Section 5. - "Registry IETF IE Sub-type ID." Please cite RFC 8137 here as well. _______________________________________________ 6tisch mailing list 6tisch@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch
