Re: [6lo] Intdir last call review of draft-ietf-6lo-minimal-fragment-04

[Dave Thaler <[e-mail]>]

Pascal wrote:
[…]

   of the destination.  Upon a first fragment, a node creates a state
   and forwards the fragment.

I’d recommend “a node *attempts to* create state and forward the fragment”,
since either of those could potentially fail, right?

Also should this use normative language (“a node MUST…”)?

The state is then used to forward the
   next fragments of the datagram.



Ø  I’d suggest MAY attempt to create the state and if successful MUST use it to forward the next fragments.

To me, that sounds like an inappropriate use of MAY.  MAY means an implementer can choose to ignore it.
Do you really mean that an implementer can choose NOT to attempt to create the state?
If it doesn’t implement attempting to create the state, then how could the mechanism work at all?

[..]


Ø  I hope you’ll be able to attend 6lo. We need to clarify the goal of the draft and the target info vs. std track.

I just checked the schedule, and I yes can attend 6lo now.
(I think there was a conflict in the draft agenda that is no longer present in the final agenda.)

Dave