Re: [C310] AUTH48 [JM]: RFC 9032 <draft-ietf-6tisch-enrollment-enhanced-beacon-14.txt> NOW AVAILABLE
"Prof. Diego Dujovne" <diego.dujovne@mail.udp.cl> Wed, 12 May 2021 21:57 UTC
Return-Path: <diego.dujovne@mail.udp.cl>
X-Original-To: c310@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: c310@rfc-editor.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D849AF407E2 for <c310@rfc-editor.org>; Wed, 12 May 2021 14:57:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -97.98
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-97.98 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.01, HTML_MESSAGE=0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=2, SPF_PASS=-0.001, SUBJECT_IN_WHITELIST=-100, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mail-udp-cl.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id udIWaHFh6Hxx for <c310@rfc-editor.org>; Wed, 12 May 2021 14:57:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ed1-x531.google.com (mail-ed1-x531.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::531]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0018CF407DE for <c310@rfc-editor.org>; Wed, 12 May 2021 14:57:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ed1-x531.google.com with SMTP id n25so28822255edr.5 for <c310@rfc-editor.org>; Wed, 12 May 2021 14:57:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mail-udp-cl.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=kvkRft3eTtmUKJiVvBmw0KJucPpQb1LiqyBqZhR+kcw=; b=ZM83UtXZE0NRNEAddueWeBHSG/3DrtGN1XxFmWBWlVL01uNdQYQ/lEcZ75EZ4O4j5c iUAL33QrL2wO8wr0sswbIkkzOS6AUWmR7bIgUZ07ztpXfjzm+Hfs84yUc8HTpUJOwljs HW/aOz+2XKMKcO3Esnz9WInOIN/xUGXpl73+P64m1u54LBFFQlmk7jY/Z2giLP6Ct0RK WVR/uwVOo9zJ8n2D0Fg50FcpI92aBNCDAjYHieWXp/RSMCCCkBF2NcKs8q+WpvTiOYJE liJwiv0bmi6b3lOyXn43o/3cHT2xSYBNRjUlm8dRanvWmbLet1x1bgl34CPlrwBjriBy yDzQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=kvkRft3eTtmUKJiVvBmw0KJucPpQb1LiqyBqZhR+kcw=; b=TRABJHp8KyKWStSPJ55jCTAJv4Jy/7WJ3YR0e6Ng17w0BuDkoKPxpF2fFdIyhWc/Nq 4d+0WoOpL8sXYLbcWPtgV6H1oW8X+OWexgDB+U5TigEXFDOcYzWXrix09lGpIYUZxTA1 KaLBn/2RVRic5xYwxtYQTF606DnK/+lTKVjNTq20BCIoWadD3xO3Wqg/neQz7Kx/CetT teoyV2rdKnTFxII+AJXmRROSUq+700kVxKR7AuI8SLTkNSjgvCxlfIuHkoHlu3Y/pnFy O6J4Jh9CsYvT0NrzmF/dg1BqbtH6xS6AukDY5FEYRJfXpcl7OmpLsl++OfdKnTeAwquO x2hw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530kINHoO2rDrae0wAFKUv9nJJkqCGIOriLWhE5MuskVGmt3Z9yU hDHTo0GIy0ii3XH8ZIJf2lBR7cwxDL3smpLGIcPG/w==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxbMfCFls51MclfjSAFTSnTQqp0RCmugABmd4zcLatRQ4RvQ64inPzcaafR85Y1iFq0U9jtchpygyF4jaffPAs=
X-Received: by 2002:aa7:c9cf:: with SMTP id i15mr46389484edt.4.1620856639144; Wed, 12 May 2021 14:57:19 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210512190604.44C8DF407BF@rfc-editor.org> <9880.1620856428@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <9880.1620856428@localhost>
From: "Prof. Diego Dujovne" <diego.dujovne@mail.udp.cl>
Date: Wed, 12 May 2021 17:57:07 -0400
Message-ID: <CAH7SZV-0Yxj4C8S_KV5FahOGyhobDk0ERry3BwbmU=6k2-DEuA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
Cc: RFC System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, 6tisch-ads@ietf.org, 6tisch-chairs@ietf.org, "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>, ek.ietf@gmail.com, c310@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000035577a05c22918e9"
Subject: Re: [C310] AUTH48 [JM]: RFC 9032 <draft-ietf-6tisch-enrollment-enhanced-beacon-14.txt> NOW AVAILABLE
X-BeenThere: c310@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <c310.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/c310>, <mailto:c310-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/c310/>
List-Post: <mailto:c310@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:c310-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/c310>, <mailto:c310-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 May 2021 21:57:22 -0000
Dear all, I have reviewed the proposed changes and Michael's responses and I agree with them. Regards, Diego Dujovne Le mer. 12 mai 2021 à 17:53, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> a écrit : > > rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org wrote: > > 1) <!--[rfced] Based on Michael's reply on the c310 list, we have > > updated this title as follows. Please review. > > > Original: IEEE 802.15.4 Information Element encapsulation of 6TiSCH > > Join and Enrollment Information > > > Current: Encapsulation of 6TiSCH Join and Enrollment Information > > Elements > > > Also, should the abbreviated title (which appears in the running > header > > of the PDF file) be updated? Seems "ICMP" is not mentioned within the > > document. > > > Current: IE for ICMPv6 > > I guess this is historical, because the first versions of the document > could > carry arbitrary ICMPv6 payloads! > > So, the abbreviated title should probably be "Enroll Beacon" > > > 2) <!-- [rfced] Please insert any keywords (beyond those that appear > in > > the title) for use on https://www.rfc-editor.org/search. > --> > > BRSKI > Enroll > zero-touch > DODAG balancing > LLN balancing > > > 3) <!-- [rfced] Would the following improve the readability of the > > sentence? We found Section 4.5.2 to provide a better overview of EB > > roles (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8180#section-4.5.2). > Should > > the section number here be changed? > > > Current: As explained in Section 6 of [RFC8180], the EB has a number > of > > purposes: synchronization of the Absolute Slot Number (ASN) and Join > > Metric, carrying the timeslot template identifier, carrying the > channel > > hopping sequence identifier, and indicating the TSCH slotframe. > > > Perhaps: As explained in Section 4.5.2 of [RFC8180], the EB has a > > number of purposes: it carries synchronization information such as > the > > Absolute Slot Number (ASN) and Join Metric and identifiers for the > > timeslot template and the channel hopping sequence, and it indicates > > the TSCH slotframe. > --> > > Yes. > > > 4) <!-- [rfced] In the following sentence, perhaps "Join Proxy" > instead > > of "Join Assistant" is meant? > > > Current: 3. A new pledge may have to receive many EBs before it can > > pick an appropriate network and/or closest Join Assistant to attach > to. > --> > > Yes, please change. JA was a term used in earlier minimal-security drafts. > (I still prefer it, but consensus was for Join Proxy) > > > 5) <!--[rfced] How may this be rephrased to clarify and to avoid > using > > the citation as an adjective? > > > Current: The PANID is part of the [IEEE.802.15.4] Layer 2 header: it > is > > ... > > > Perhaps: The PANID is part of the Layer 2 header as defined in > > [IEEE.802.15.4]: it is ... > --> > > Okay. > > > 6) <!-- [rfced] Please clarify this sentence. Does "conceived of in a > > similar fashion as" mean "considered similar to"? > > > Current: The PANID provides a context similar to the Extended Service > > Set ID (ESSID) in 802.11 networking and can be conceived of in a > > similar fashion as the 802.3 Ethernet VLAN tag in that it provides > > context for all Layer 2 addresses. > > > Perhaps: The PANID provides a context similar to the Extended Service > > Set ID (ESSID) in 802.11 networking and can be considered similar to > > the 802.3 Ethernet VLAN tag in that it provides context for all > Layer 2 > > addresses. > --> > > Yes, that's better. > > > > 7) <!-- [rfced] We note that the following is inconsistently > > capitalized. How would you like it to be capitalized? > > > PAN priority field - 3 instances pan priority field - 3 instances > --> > > "PAN" needs to be in upper case. It stood for Personal Area Network, > from a time when 802.15.4 was going to be all about wearables, but at this > point it's just "PAN". > > > 8) <!-- [rfced] May we capitalize "reserved" here to match the > > formatting of the rest of the definition list? > > > Current: res: reserved bits MUST be ignored upon receipt and SHOULD > be > > set to 0 when sending. > > > Perhaps: res: Reserved bits MUST be ignored upon receipt and SHOULD > be > > set to 0 when sending. > > Yes, I like it capitalized like this. > > > Or perhaps: res: Any reserved bits MUST be ignored upon receipt and > > SHOULD be set to 0 when sending. > --> > > > 9) <!-- [rfced] In the sentence below, is perhaps "Join Proxy" > instead > > of "enrollment proxy" meant? > > > Current: A priority of 0x7f indicates that the announcer should never > > be considered as a viable enrollment proxy. > --> > > So, we renamed the document from Join to Enrollment, because "Join" means > something different to ROLL WG types. > In ROLL documents yet to arrive at the RPC, both terms are used in the same > document. > > It would be better to leave this field as Enrollment Proxy. > If I could have convinced 6tisch-minimal-security to change too, I would be > happier. > > -- > Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting ) > Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide > -- DIEGO DUJOVNE Profesor Asociado Escuela de Informática y Telecomunicaciones Facultad de Ingeniería - Universidad Diego Portales - Chile www.ingenieria.udp.cl (56 2) 676 8125
- [C310] AUTH48 [JM]: RFC 9032 <draft-ietf-6tisch-e… rfc-editor
- Re: [C310] AUTH48 [JM]: RFC 9032 <draft-ietf-6tis… rfc-editor
- Re: [C310] AUTH48 [JM]: RFC 9032 <draft-ietf-6tis… Michael Richardson
- Re: [C310] AUTH48 [JM]: RFC 9032 <draft-ietf-6tis… Prof. Diego Dujovne
- Re: [C310] AUTH48 [JM]: RFC 9032 <draft-ietf-6tis… Michael Richardson
- Re: [C310] AUTH48 [JM]: RFC 9032 <draft-ietf-6tis… Michael Richardson
- Re: [C310] AUTH48 [JM]: RFC 9032 <draft-ietf-6tis… Prof. Diego Dujovne
- Re: [C310] AUTH48 [JM]: RFC 9032 <draft-ietf-6tis… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [C310] AUTH48 [JM]: RFC 9032 <draft-ietf-6tis… Michael Richardson
- Re: [C310] AUTH48 [JM]: RFC 9032 <draft-ietf-6tis… Jean Mahoney
- Re: [C310] AUTH48 [JM]: RFC 9032 <draft-ietf-6tis… Prof. Diego Dujovne
- Re: [C310] AUTH48 [JM]: RFC 9032 <draft-ietf-6tis… Jean Mahoney
- Re: [C310] AUTH48 [JM]: RFC 9032 <draft-ietf-6tis… Michael Richardson
- Re: [C310] AUTH48 [JM]: RFC 9032 <draft-ietf-6tis… Jean Mahoney