Re: [lp-wan] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-lpwan-schc-over-lorawan-13: (with COMMENT)

[Olivier Gimenez <[e-mail]>]

Hello Barry,



Thank you for your review. Even if LoRa is the short of LOng RAnge, LoRaWAN is a registered trademark and I have been asked not to expand it as it is not supposed to be expanded.

Nevertheless I updated the introduction to reference the LoRaWAN specification, and added a LoRaWAN entry in the terminology section



Please see this commit<https://github.com/Acklio/schc-over-lorawan/commit/3e0d0f44ef719740a51b2e62139a4166e8726bfe> for the changes.



Best regards

Olivier



> -----Original Message-----

> From: Barry Leiba via Datatracker <[e-mail]>

> Sent: 05 November 2020 04:52

> To: The IESG <[e-mail]>

> Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; lp-

> [e-mail]; Dominique Barthel <[e-mail]>;

> [e-mail]

> Subject: Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-lpwan-schc-over-lorawan-13:

> (with COMMENT)

>

> Warning - External Email

> ________________________________

>

> Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for

> draft-ietf-lpwan-schc-over-lorawan-13: No Objection

>

> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email

> addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory

> paragraph, however.)

>

>

> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html

> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

>

>

> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lpwan-schc-over-lorawan/

>

>

>

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

> COMMENT:

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> The title, Abstract, and Introduction all use “LoRaWAN” without expansion or

> explanation.  I suggest expanding it as “Long Range WAN” in all three places,

> and citing [lora-alliance-spec] at that expansion in the Introduction (you dont

> cite it until Section 4).

>

> Please expand LPWAN on first use in the Introduction.

>

> And a comment about Martin’s comment: “I found this document to be very

> tough going without reading through RFC8724.” ... Well, to be fair, 8724 is a

> normative reference, so isn’t that sort of expected?

>

>



To view our privacy policy, including the types of personal information we collect, process and share, and the rights and options you have in this respect, see www.semtech.com/legal.