Re: [C310] AUTH48 [JM]: RFC 9032 <draft-ietf-6tisch-enrollment-enhanced-beacon-14.txt> NOW AVAILABLE

["Prof. Diego Dujovne" <[e-mail]>]

Dear all,
               I answer below.
Regards,

            Diego

Le mer. 12 mai 2021 à 18:15, Michael Richardson <[e-mail]> a
écrit :

>
> I am reading:
>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9032-rfcdiff.html (side-by-side)
>
> These are my comments, and I see that almost all of them should be taken
> with
> a grain of salt.  I grew up in a bilingual Canadian province (EH!) with the
> highest Tim Horton's per-capita and nobody actually taught me English in
> school.
> (Mon Francais est aussi un poutine)
>
>
Neither am I a native speaker, so I am glad to learn from your suggestions.


>
> You changed:
>     Neighbor Discovery (ND) could even more scarce.
> to  Neighbor Discovery (ND) could be even scarcer.
>

> My limited experience with many readers is that although "scarcer" is a
> word
> and means exactly what we need it to, that it isn't as well understood.
>
>
Agreed.


> You changed:
>    1.  Use of a multicast slot by even a non-malicious unauthenticated
>        node for a Router Solicitation (RS) may overwhelm that time slot.
>
>    2.  It may require many seconds of on-time before a new pledge
>        receives a Router Advertisement (RA) that it can use.
>
> to:
>
> 1.  Use of a multicast slot by even a non-malicious unauthenticated
>     node for an RS may overwhelm that timeslot.
> 2.  It may require many seconds of on-time before a new pledge
>     receives an RA that it can use.
>
> I had explicitely expanded RS and RA a second time here, because I found
> that
> many Layer 2 knowledgeable reasons were not as familiar with these Layer 3
> terms, but that saying it again helped them get it.
> I know that this goes against "define it the first time", but I felt that
> the
> Introduction needed to be more easily understood.
>

I agree. I see that "an" is used because of the pronunciation of the
acronyms RA and RS.


>
> You changed "an RPL" to "a RPL" in:
>     is to serve as a RPL parent [RFC6550] within a particular network
>
> and this just sounds wrong to me.  I dunno...
>

In RFC 6550 it is used as "a RPL", because it is pronounced RPL as "ripl"
I guess.


>
> I'm pretty happy with the entire document as you've edited so..
>
> --
> Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>   . 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