IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Roll] I-D Action: draft-ietf-roll-p2p-rpl-10 comments

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Sun, 06 May 2012 19:28 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20BAD21F84E2 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 May 2012 12:28:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.706
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.706 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.248, BAYES_00=-2.599, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id diFARVJ2QnMY for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 May 2012 12:28:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (relay.cooperix.net [67.23.6.41]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8933B21F84D1 for <Roll@ietf.org>; Sun, 6 May 2012 12:28:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (desk.marajade.sandelman.ca [209.87.252.247]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 02CD18CA7; Sun, 6 May 2012 15:27:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 88B4498B98; Sun, 6 May 2012 15:28:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from marajade.sandelman.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82AD898470; Sun, 6 May 2012 15:28:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Roll@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <1354322643.282916.1336268038026.JavaMail.root@mail17.pantherlink.uwm.edu>
References: <1354322643.282916.1336268038026.JavaMail.root@mail17.pantherlink.uwm.edu>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.3; nmh 1.3-dev; XEmacs 21.4 (patch 22)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Sun, 06 May 2012 15:28:22 -0400
Message-ID: <9348.1336332502@marajade.sandelman.ca>
Sender: mcr@sandelman.ca
Subject: Re: [Roll] I-D Action: draft-ietf-roll-p2p-rpl-10 comments
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/roll>
List-Post: <mailto:roll@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 May 2012 19:28:24 -0000

    adrian> Could you enhance the text around the suggested defaults and
    adrian> the guidance to expand a little on what the problems might
    adrian> be, and encourage specific experimentation and reports back
    adrian> to the WG? 

>>>>> "Mukul" == Mukul Goyal <mukul@uwm.edu> writes:
    Mukul> Sure I will do that.

I believe we are talking about section 6.1 and 9.2, correct?

My suggestion is that the "controversial" values like this SHOULD be
identified more clearly with text akin to:
     Specific consideration of this value MUST be addressed
     in applicability statement(s).

(I'd even like to put some kind of 2119-like word in about this)

-- 
]       He who is tired of Weird Al is tired of life!           |  firewalls  [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON    |net architect[
] mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |device driver[
   Kyoto Plus: watch the video <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzx1ycLXQSE>
	               then sign the petition.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email