<6tisch-boun...@ietf.org> *On Behalf Of *Mališa Vucinic
> *Sent:* mercredi 12 décembre 2018 15:01
>
>
> *To:* Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
>
> *Cc:* Michael Richardson ; 6tisch@ietf.org
>
>
> *Subject:* Re: [6tisch] WGLC for
> https://www.ietf.org/id/
ct: Re: [6tisch] WGLC for
https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-6tisch-architecture-17.txt
Hello Pascal,
Most of the resolutions to my comments look good. Couple of nits inline.
Mališa
[PT>] I think we need to define an entry for CoJP, similar to 6P. What about;
CoJP (Constrained Join Protoco
Hello Pascal,
Most of the resolutions to my comments look good. Couple of nits inline.
Mališa
*[PT>] *I think we need to define an entry for CoJP, similar to 6P. What
> about;
>
>CoJP (Constrained Join Protocol): CoJP is a one-touch join protocol
>
>defined in the Minimal
Hello Yatch
Many thanks for your review! Let's see below
> [Definition of 6P / Section 2.2 and Figure 1]
>
> In the terminology section, 6top is explained as follows:
>
>6top (6TiSCH Operation Sublayer): The next highest layer of the IEEE
>Std 802.15.4 TSCH medium access
Hello Mališa
Many thanks for the in depth review. Let’s see below:
Here are my comments on draft-ietf-6tisch-architecture. I used the latest
version of the draft hosted on bitbucket. In general, an editorial pass on the
whole document would be useful, there are some typos here and there. The
WGLC for
https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-6tisch-architecture-17.txt
Hello Pascal,
Here are my comments on draft-ietf-6tisch-architecture. I used the latest
version of the draft hosted on bitbucket. In general, an editorial pass on the
whole document would be useful, there are some typos here
Thank you, Pascal.
> Please let me know if you intend to provide a review soon.
Yes. Here are my additional but minor comments:
---
[Definition of 6P / Section 2.2 and Figure 1]
In the terminology section, 6top is explained as follows:
6top (6TiSCH Operation Sublayer): The next highest
bject: Re: [6tisch] WGLC for https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-6tisch-
> architecture-17.txt
>
> Hi Pascal,
>
> I'm reviewing the architecture draft, although the deadline has already
> passed... I have one comment.
>
> I see some ideas which don't have concrete pro
Hi Pascal,
I'm reviewing the architecture draft, although the deadline has already
passed... I have one comment.
I see some ideas which don't have concrete protocol specifications discussed as
WG drafts, for instance, centralized reservation and tracks. They look like
kind of "concepts" at
Hello Pascal,
Here are my comments on draft-ietf-6tisch-architecture. I used the latest
version of the draft hosted on bitbucket. In general, an editorial pass on
the whole document would be useful, there are some typos here and there.
The main issue I see is that Section 6.1 is completely
gt;
> Please note this makes you contributor. I also added your name in the
> contributor section if you do not mind.
>
>
>
> Take care,
>
>
>
> Pascal
>
>
>
> *From:* Simon Duquennoy
> *Sent:* jeudi 22 novembre 2018 09:50
> *To:* Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
> *
https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-6tisch-architecture-17.txt
Hi Pascal, WG,
I drafted a summary of MSF for potential inclusion in 4.4.2.
The proposal is to:
(1) Remove MSF mention in "An optional Scheduling Function (SF) such as MSF
[I-D.ietf-6tisch-msf] is used to"
-> "An optional
Hi Pascal, WG,
I drafted a summary of MSF for potential inclusion in 4.4.2.
The proposal is to:
(1) Remove MSF mention in "An optional Scheduling Function (SF) such as MSF
[I-D.ietf-6tisch-msf] is used to"
-> "An optional Scheduling Function (SF) is used to"
(2) Add the following paragraph at
Dear WG :
We are now starting the working group last call for the 6TiSCH Architecture
based on https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-6tisch-architecture-17.txt. This
document is the merge of the previous architecture and terminology documents.
Authors of our WIP WG docs
14 matches
Mail list logo
