IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [6tisch] #41 (minimal): intended status for draft minimal

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Mon, 07 December 2015 18:48 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: 6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B1381B3975 for <6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Dec 2015 10:48:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.59
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.59 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vCi4GN8Gzdu8 for <6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Dec 2015 10:48:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (relay.cooperix.net [176.58.120.209]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E36A1B2A1B for <6tisch@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Dec 2015 10:48:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (unknown [192.252.136.159]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B79A022086; Mon, 7 Dec 2015 13:48:14 -0500 (EST)
Received: by sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 90D1962086; Mon, 7 Dec 2015 12:56:50 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net>
In-reply-to: <56658C18.5040605@innovationslab.net>
References: <060.92a20915e49c32f8bffbbbb0b4a66869@tools.ietf.org> <075.1f97e51c53b1c124937a2b6c7fca39d7@tools.ietf.org> <a864c3f122d24d638adf712ed92054cd@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com> <CAMsDxWTA_aAb_ctDk3JTK7M1Z+WJ=9z7yjjqc9KKq2vs2pcKEQ@mail.gmail.com> <22109.37055.77491.693618@fireball.acr.fi> <CAMsDxWQP=3=+-pc1SV=qtGud8E9w2dH8NsycjboNFRPtUhaTrw@mail.gmail.com> <56658C18.5040605@innovationslab.net>
Comments: In-reply-to Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net> message dated "Mon, 07 Dec 2015 08:39:36 -0500."
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6+dev; GNU Emacs 24.4.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2015 12:56:50 -0500
Message-ID: <9435.1449511010@dooku.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/6tisch/5SeLVrLrqhNOtPksJEqCKFpulL0>
Cc: 6tisch@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [6tisch] #41 (minimal): intended status for draft minimal
X-BeenThere: 6tisch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discuss link layer model for Deterministic IPv6 over the TSCH mode of IEEE 802.15.4e, and impacts on RPL and 6LoWPAN such as resource allocation" <6tisch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/6tisch>, <mailto:6tisch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/6tisch/>
List-Post: <mailto:6tisch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6tisch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch>, <mailto:6tisch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2015 18:48:21 -0000

Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net> wrote:
    > 2. RFC 7668 falls in the standards track, in my opinion, due to the
    > strict guidance provided in sectins 3.2.3, 3.2.4, and 3.2.5. If those
    > rules are not followed, IPv6-over-BTLE won't work. Those types of
    > statements can be advanced along the standards track (PS -> IS). The
    > "advice" in minimal is far less declarative and appears to be advisory.

    > As I said in Yokohama, I can see minimal being re-worded as a standards
    > track document, but today it reads like a BCP or Informational
    > document.

I believe that this is a bug in the text, not in the intention.
A kind of shyness :-)

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email