Re: [6tisch] Iotdir early review of draft-ietf-6tisch-enrollment-enhanced-beacon-05

Suresh Krishnan <> Tue, 29 October 2019 03:07 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9D6B120047; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 20:07:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id igWvw6y4zHUj; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 20:07:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 03BC5120046; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 20:07:17 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901;; cv=none; b=gJbAWfcG7tYWENqLijGQYdvAFilU7u+jGKgWmQ/1HsIO2juoCfM2hSHspOcMuKIy5zCf8BV88GT6Xf4pJa9pzjA9/772dre1npc6yO1j2yys7URrJ1JNNDmQXd0aTpR+Bl5jKhhVjAHziS668wKN/lv3LhEeLk6DtpZ7ffjwkNpq3kUXAEzlRJIRkldlHPZRGmUsinJ2zGptQNxWOcEs2vaJYUU+TyBLkbTRbudIQXHNpYOvhXIaROcam5jPWfh51el46TlEmBId3YDeQ3vqEbHB1eySCGmBlE8D/yCyE8TIXXFz4JWLzhlrQautXPTj717hqtxw1zpSIm70kNG3aw==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=klo7XL7/irkCxteQbwtge1YwlQcwxDzTNeekQqHMJPA=; b=fgSdG7ZSLKK7K31AgduxmW3IK72mK8bk3/wJ9fwual5BvxS9cXj38YdWfsR3F27ZrGlQS8JOfoabC5NGah1iKETIL3MmXcViCByWzm99Tc1uN/7rcFDcpJ27xBEmlSmi6LpTWJLrOil62sPNGVB/Q6FhfPwQzYKlq95dyIwE+yYlpjYJfJXCgRi95wt+bG/5f6Zaq8olc+vUmZtVviO3EUzjE2dCEHAOcEQhjuBjHg5PbbHaNwZIiMRgtXpVXezSbg8JxcOK7BR/mW7K3Ept6g7wUZWyl2voZKzjjfEnlLHCtrurOo3Bp5podamOposgMswpHrPV97nRtv1V5qAEoA==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; 1; spf=pass; dmarc=pass action=none; dkim=pass; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=klo7XL7/irkCxteQbwtge1YwlQcwxDzTNeekQqHMJPA=; b=F6xTeRYfmk5siyysMW7nU4mCbwzunki8GBWPNDcskFA9luaK6edpZddvOtRmEHuS/aLbHGGE7mRA/Rz+7LiLYopdKA7IAxOd96MdrRY1aRTVryELQwsVREK0X2b7lQ+PWmOHKhjzzVmeMxMcSRa5iJD12MAsNJRCl6rMQ19jg04=
Received: from YT1PR01MB3642.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ( by YT1PR01MB3561.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2387.23; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 03:07:15 +0000
Received: from YT1PR01MB3642.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::c00b:23f0:4c61:f412]) by YT1PR01MB3642.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::c00b:23f0:4c61:f412%6]) with mapi id 15.20.2387.021; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 03:07:15 +0000
From: Suresh Krishnan <>
To: Carles Gomez <>
CC: "" <>, "" <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: Iotdir early review of draft-ietf-6tisch-enrollment-enhanced-beacon-05
Thread-Index: AQHVioRMaTwySiC3mE+nwR1H7HygjKdw9uWA
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 03:07:15 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is );
x-originating-ip: []
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: dd62bfd5-fd33-4477-1661-08d75c1d1a15
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: YT1PR01MB3561:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <YT1PR01MB35614933D9FAB9BFD42915F1B4610@YT1PR01MB3561.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 0205EDCD76
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(366004)(136003)(39850400004)(396003)(376002)(346002)(199004)(189003)(14454004)(80792005)(14444005)(8936002)(508600001)(5660300002)(2171002)(6512007)(256004)(66066001)(6436002)(446003)(11346002)(305945005)(7736002)(71190400001)(4326008)(316002)(71200400001)(476003)(6246003)(486006)(6486002)(25786009)(2616005)(66446008)(26005)(102836004)(186003)(2906002)(3846002)(76116006)(66476007)(86362001)(33656002)(6116002)(66574012)(66946007)(54906003)(6916009)(91956017)(8676002)(81156014)(81166006)(99286004)(66556008)(76176011)(53546011)(6506007)(64756008)(36756003)(229853002)(379964003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:YT1PR01MB3561; H:YT1PR01MB3642.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None ( does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: hhNQ2C/vheb46ckzUgZz6tN0B7oFJeYcaEDc6yO7LFVv7BWNhJz4vtOy/AJOUFdvet680hjgCbsGLJtYZJy+uj7aeNEsc9omUn4inzECvew5dUT1HOekQC9hCPOJoowm45g6ogNYYepQQFd+gIjj8cbyq2uuKOkykSfbGKc33XQhKvajS0rZ1mTOa1dEGL54KWqqU1gBoB1vYx3WpWmbECNG2D9OWvz/J3vV/ATi8KkswpTZaXHu3xz4JoXfhFgLhsuSJ/+1Hf5qwsMwItO3vO6Sfdk+EEd10BqUVOMJeBw6EVPU3H0zQBmArBaupIL//yTKva4uVOI4L9/FKxlDus79KLymU/unAgJ/ZzGatUhwRqC/CA8j50TExwOKjQijXSKGXCWkIzkzpkhQU6iyLCkZSb4MvbDPbifaJgO4G5omb3pnpspzqlGD53MZIM9C
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: dd62bfd5-fd33-4477-1661-08d75c1d1a15
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 29 Oct 2019 03:07:15.6801 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 47d58e26-f796-48e8-ac40-1c365c204513
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: z642E1sIQelD7ZzFInKdb2TzaC/sNgNChku2LIO/IFdja4aSiZlmIyDHB84vqZpAsrPoEN8tGKq1cV+9KuwiYw==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: YT1PR01MB3561
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [6tisch] Iotdir early review of draft-ietf-6tisch-enrollment-enhanced-beacon-05
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 03:07:20 -0000

Thanks a lot Carles for your careful review and your text change proposals. Authors, any thoughts on these changes?


> On Oct 24, 2019, at 12:01 PM, Carles Gomez via Datatracker <> wrote:
> Reviewer: Carles Gomez
> Review result: Ready with Issues
> Thanks to the authors for writing this document.
> I did not identify technical problems. (There are comments below that do have a
> technical side, but the issues might just be editorial.)
> There is a number of suggestions provided below, mostly editorial and about
> presentation.
> Title
> - "IEEE802.15.4" --> "IEEE 802.15.4"
> - "Informational Element" --> "Information Element"
> - "6tisch" --> "6TiSCH"
> Abstract: I'd suggest adding a comma after "In TSCH mode of IEEE STD 802.15.4".
> Section 1.
> - "As further details" --> "As further detailed"
> - Introduce the acronym "EB" the first time that "Enhanced Beacon" appears.
> (Then use "EB" thereafter in the document.)
> Subsection 1.2.
> - After "synchronization of ASN and Join Metric," perhaps you may insert
> "carrying" and reorganize a bit the rest of the sentence. - "existance" -->
> "existence" - "There are a limited number...". --> "There is a limited
> number..." - "... by each router". Perhaps, to give more context, "by each
> router in the network".
> Subsection 1.3.
> - Title: please add ":" after "synchronization".
> - Title: capitalize "solicitations" and "advertisements"
> - On the first use of RS, RA, NS and NA, please use the expanded form and
> introduce the acronym, and use the acronym thereafter. - "consuming a broadcast
> aloha slot with unencrypted traffic" appears to be one of the reasons
> mentioned, but it is a bit hidden between parenthesis. You may want to
> reorganize the sentence to emphasize that this is actually the crucial point. -
> Second bullet in the list: did you mean "RA" instead of "Router Soliciation" -
> Third bullet in the list: "If it must listen for a RS as well..." Did you mean
> "listen for an RA" ?
> - It might be nice to close Section 1 by adding something along the lines of
> "This document defines...". However, this would not be specific to subsection
> 1.3. Therefore, some reorganization of Section 1 might improve the document.
> Section 2.
> - Even if there is a single figure in the whole document, it might be good to
> add a figure number and a caption the format for the new IE subtype. - After
> the figure, is there a particular reason why the fields of the format are
> presented in a different order from the one in the format? - Please add a ":"
> after the name of each field and its definition/description. - "this field
> indicates the willingness to act as join proxy". Perhaps "the willingness of
> the sender to act..."? - "Lower value indicates willing to act as a Join
> Proxy..." Perhaps "Lower value indicates greater willingness to act as..." -
> "Values range 0 (most willing)..." --> "Values range 0x00 (most willing)..." -
> In the figure, one field is called "Join Proxy lower-64". In the text, it has a
> different name... - "if the Proxy Address P-flag is set, then the lower 64-bits
> of the Join Proxy’s Link Layer address..." Did you mean "link-local" instead of
> "Link Layer? - "the layer-2 address of any IPv6 traffic to the originator". Did
> you mean "the destination layer-2 address..." ? - "if the P bit is set, then 64
> bits (8 bytes) of address are present." I had trouble understanding this
> sentence. Please consider rewriting it. - "this is an variable length field"
> --> "this is a variable length field".
> Section 5.
> - "Registry IETF IE Sub-type ID." Please cite RFC 8137 here as well.