Re: [6lowpan] [ADs] AUTH48 [MF]: RFC 6282 <draft-ietf-6lowpan-hc-15.txt>

Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 10 August 2011 19:21 UTC

Return-Path: <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: 6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C63B711E8089 for <6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 12:21:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.544
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.544 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.055, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6IYwGd-g46ET for <6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 12:21:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com (mail-vx0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A944C11E8078 for <6lowpan@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 12:21:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vxi29 with SMTP id 29so1376225vxi.31 for <6lowpan@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 12:21:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=oV6sOuEN87OgH8ROIFe9nzdQObPrbKg5S8AINsQNx6U=; b=c70rl3j/TdVQ2+olOMtRFBEg1SRLDfuWqLfYrBIYejbpEHhcM9+SZP9aT6C5yJhhyN WDVCWMrtpsoShrvAcNTEI0UH3zdUbY7Q+9/+9A36OOyZPb5EZ5tiKT8nZg0SI0hWO+kw l6TwmGZzH5mJAW274HA4vAFelk4zXul3BCksY=
Received: by 10.52.65.194 with SMTP id z2mr9011004vds.76.1313004114595; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 12:21:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bxb-rdroms-8712.cisco.com (198-135-0-233.cisco.com [198.135.0.233]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k10sm896303vdi.43.2011.08.10.12.21.52 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 10 Aug 2011 12:21:53 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <8FD192A3-8CBA-40A5-A93C-01E4BA42E10D@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:21:50 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <A5685195-0190-49F6-87FF-B53CD11F1777@gmail.com>
References: <6A2A459175DABE4BB11DE2026AA50A5D05228480@XMB-AMS-107.cisco.com> <DE69914A-2813-4044-AEA7-A716FE2157CE@tzi.org> <56748029-05E7-4B09-8C50-C9EADD5629A0@tzi.org> <430C1B59-E048-4CC7-9E75-EF4E54D1104F@amsl.com> <6A2A459175DABE4BB11DE2026AA50A5D053A3C92@XMB-AMS-107.cisco.com> <EC44989C-2AEB-4D9E-975A-2950E88D86D8@cisco.com> <F5FB5007-BDDB-4E55-8249-CCE07FF201FF@tzi.org> <1313002234.15378.54.camel@d430> <8FD192A3-8CBA-40A5-A93C-01E4BA42E10D@cisco.com>
To: Megan Ferguson <mferguson@amsl.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: Droms Ralph <rdroms@cisco.com>, RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, geoff Mulligan <geoff@proto6.com>, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, 6lowpan 6lowpan <6lowpan@ietf.org>, 6lowpan-ads@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [6lowpan] [ADs] AUTH48 [MF]: RFC 6282 <draft-ietf-6lowpan-hc-15.txt>
X-BeenThere: 6lowpan@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working group discussion for IPv6 over LowPan networks <6lowpan.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/6lowpan>, <mailto:6lowpan-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/6lowpan>
List-Post: <mailto:6lowpan@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6lowpan-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan>, <mailto:6lowpan-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 19:21:31 -0000

Megan - to be clear, I'm satisfied that the most recent version of the document is ready to publish...

- Ralph

On Aug 10, 2011, at 3:02 PM 8/10/11, Ralph Droms wrote:

> Well, characterizations as "willy-nilly" aside, I took the time to follow through the trail of definitions so as to know exactly what a reference like "The 6LoWPAN adaptation format" actually means.  As RFC 4944 variously uses "IEEE802.15.4 network", "6LoWPAN"  and "LoWPAN, I thought it might be good to suggest a consistent naming scheme.
> 
> However, I'm willing to leave the doc the way it is; as I wrote, I don't mean to delay the publication process, just trying to help.
> 
> - Ralph
> 
> On Aug 10, 2011, at 2:50 PM 8/10/11, geoff wrote:
> 
>> I completely agree with Carsten.  HC1 is not applicable to 802.15.4
>> networks in general but to 6lowpan networks - they are different.
>> 
>> I think we need to stop willy-nilly changes and get this document
>> published.
>> 
>> 	geoff
>> 
>> On Wed, 2011-08-10 at 20:25 +0200, Carsten Bormann wrote:
>>> On Aug 10, 2011, at 20:15, Ralph Droms wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Following up on Pascal's observation, I looked through the entire doc for occurrences of "6lopwan".  In my opinion, all of those occurrences could be replaced with "IEEE802.15.4-based network"; in some cases s/the 6lowpan/an IEEE802.15.4-based network/   In either case, note the lower-case "network".
>>> 
>>> Hmm, I'm not so sure that actually improves the text.  (Consistency is the hob...)
>>> (I'm not even sure about Pascal's observation, because the reason for the insufficiency of HC1 is not with IEEE802.15.4, but with the way we use it in 6LoWPANs.)
>>> 
>>> I actually think Megan's most recent version is perfect, and we should ship that.
>>> 
>>> Gruesse, Carsten
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Not meaning to delay the publication process further, but I think we should take a second to consider consistency...
>>>> 
>>>> - Ralph
>>>> 
>>>> On Aug 9, 2011, at 1:04 PM 8/9/11, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hello Megan
>>>>> 
>>>>> I think that for consistency:
>>>>> 
>>>>> LOWPAN_HC1 and LOWPAN_HC2 are insufficient for most practical uses of
>>>>> IPv6 in 6LoWPANs.  LOWPAN_HC1 is most effective for link-local
>>>>> 
>>>>> Should also become
>>>>> 
>>>>> LOWPAN_HC1 and LOWPAN_HC2 are insufficient for most practical uses of
>>>>> IPv6 in IEEE 802.15.4-Based Networks. LOWPAN_HC1 is most effective
>>>>> for link-local
>>>>> 
>>>>> Don't you think?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Pascal
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Megan Ferguson [mailto:mferguson@amsl.com]
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 5:02 PM
>>>>>> To: Carsten Bormann; Ralph Droms (rdroms); Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
>>>>>> Cc: 6lowpan; RFC Editor; 6lowpan-ads@tools.ietf.org
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [6lowpan] [ADs] AUTH48 [MF]: RFC 6282
>>>>> <draft-ietf-6lowpan-hc-
>>>>>> 15.txt>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Carsten, Pascal, and *ADs,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thank you for your reply.  We have updated the title as requested.
>>>>> Please
>>>>>> note that we have also updated the expansion of 6LoWPAN (in the text)
>>>>> to
>>>>>> match that in the title of RFC 4919.  Additionally, we have updated
>>>>> the short
>>>>>> title that appears in the running header of the document (this is best
>>>>>> reviewed in the text file below).  Please review and approve these
>>>>> updates
>>>>>> or let us know if a different approach in either of these additional
>>>>> updates
>>>>>> would be preferable.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc6282-lastdiff.html
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The text, XML, and comprehensive diff files are viewable at:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc6282.txt
>>>>>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc6282.xml
>>>>>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc6282-diff.html
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Note that it may be necessary for you to refresh your browser to view
>>>>>> the most recent version of the document.  Please review the document
>>>>>> carefully to ensure satisfaction as we do not make changes once the
>>>>>> document has been published as an RFC.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Upon careful review, please contact us with any further updates or
>>>>> with
>>>>>> your approval of the document in its current form.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc6282
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thank you.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> RFC Editor/mf
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Aug 8, 2011, at 1:44 PM, Carsten Bormann wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> OK, I have reread all the messages, and I'm now ready to declare a
>>>>> (rough)
>>>>>> consensus for
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 	Compression Format for IPv6 Datagrams over IEEE 802.15.4-based
>>>>>> Networks
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> (with an ever so slight edge for the -based, which is different from
>>>>> RFC
>>>>>> 4944, but "Datagrams" is different, too).
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> While there were a number of voices for keeping 6LoWPAN in the title
>>>>> (as
>>>>>> in RFC 4919), there did not seem to be consensus for that.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I apologize for holding up this RFC for so long for what is pretty
>>>>> much a
>>>>>> bikeshed color issue.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> And, yes, I'm slowly getting back to IETF work, and will try to
>>>>> start popping
>>>>>> the stack.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Gruesse, Carsten
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 6lowpan mailing list
>>> 6lowpan@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
>> 
>> 
>