Re: [6lowpan] [Roll] draft-bormann-ghc

Yoshihiro Ohba <yoshihiro.ohba@toshiba.co.jp> Wed, 05 September 2012 08:05 UTC

Return-Path: <yoshihiro.ohba@toshiba.co.jp>
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 7279021F8697 for <6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 01:05:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.089
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.089 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XkLjWpab+dXI for <6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 01:05:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from imx2.toshiba.co.jp (inet-tsb5.toshiba.co.jp [202.33.96.24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B835221F8699 for <6lowpan@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 01:05:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from arc1.toshiba.co.jp ([133.199.194.235]) by imx2.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id q8585nsG016182; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 17:05:49 +0900 (JST)
Received: (from root@localhost) by arc1.toshiba.co.jp id q8585n8Q005436; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 17:05:49 +0900 (JST)
Received: from unknown [133.199.192.144] by arc1.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id TAA05431; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 17:05:49 +0900
Received: from mx.toshiba.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ovp2.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id q8585nag006800; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 17:05:49 +0900 (JST)
Received: from tsbpoa.po.toshiba.co.jp by toshiba.co.jp id q8585miF023260; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 17:05:48 +0900 (JST)
Received: from [133.196.20.88] by mail.po.toshiba.co.jp (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.1 HotFix 0.05 (built Oct 21 2004)) with ESMTPA id <0M9V00HD5AHNH0N0@mail.po.toshiba.co.jp>; Wed, 05 Sep 2012 17:05:48 +0900 (JST)
Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 17:05:51 +0900
From: Yoshihiro Ohba <yoshihiro.ohba@toshiba.co.jp>
In-reply-to: <4DF53A33-9BAE-4344-8108-4F789D54CCA6@tzi.org>
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
Message-id: <504707DF.4090504@toshiba.co.jp>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT
References: <18113.1339529290@marajade.sandelman.ca> <FA27D934-E3D9-4D1D-A110-DE7B47F82B2A@yahoo.fr> <CABONVQb5G=9RhpStqa-E6ohz1SLUsxAhvVytBN7emvXXjLU8hA@mail.gmail.com> <87AC724B-DC1F-41C2-9F1F-4357FA7B45A3@tzi.org> <31218.1345834358@sandelman.ca> <94E510D0-CFD3-45D5-BB4B-081A27D6AA4E@tzi.org> <5046E036.1070704@toshiba.co.jp> <4DF53A33-9BAE-4344-8108-4F789D54CCA6@tzi.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0
Cc: 6lowpan@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [6lowpan] [Roll] draft-bormann-ghc
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, 05 Sep 2012 08:05:52 -0000

Hi Carsten,

Thank you for your response.

Why do you think the *** style is less clear?

Thanks,
Yoshihiro Ohba

(2012/09/05 16:24), Carsten Bormann wrote:
> On Sep 5, 2012, at 07:16, Yoshihiro Ohba <yoshihiro.ohba@toshiba.co.jp> wrote:
>
>> It would be appreciated if someone can answer to my technical review
>> of GHC draft which I sent to the list:
>>
>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/6lowpan/current/msg03513.html
>
> Hi Yoshihiro,
>
> I read that comment as an editorial suggestion, so I didn't see the need to discuss it in detail on the list.
>
> I actually don't believe munching up all the variable bits into "***" makes the exposition clearer.
> So far, all people I have talked to didn't have a misunderstanding about what was meant by, say, 11nnnkkk.
> The "***" style may be more pedantically "correct", but I think it is actually less clear.
> (And implementers mostly read the examples to figure out stuff anyway...)
>
> Grüße, Carsten
>
>