Re: [Hipsec] WGLC: draft-ietf-hip-native-api-06

["Ahrenholz, Jeffrey M" <[e-mail]>]

> > You might reference ORCHIDs earlier on (maybe second or 
> third paragraph
> > of introduction) as the first time they appear in this 
> draft is section
> > 4.2.
> 
> Done.

OK, in the new ORCHID text, you might use "derived" instead of
"derivated".

> I agree that the HIT vs. ORCHID usage was confusing. I replaced all 
> orchid names with HITs in order to unify the naming scheme in 
> the API. 
> Is it ok now?

yes, I think it is clearer now

> > but then Section 4.1 Page 6, 2nd paragraph talks about using PF_HIP
> > "The use of the PF_HIP constant" ...
> 
> I rephrased this, please check if it is ok now.

looks good

> > typedef struct in6_addr orchid_t; typedef orchid_t hip_hit_t;
> 
> I am not sure what to do about it because I decided to unify the 
> constants just to use always "hit".

yes now all the constants use "hit" so the "orchid" name is not needed

-Jeff