Re: [Roll] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-roll-applicability-home-building-08

[peter van der Stok <[e-mail]>]

Hi Adrian,

good news. I try to do the update this week.

Greetings, thanks,

Peter

Adrian Farrel schreef op 2015-03-23 20:12:
> Hi Peter,
> 
> This all looks good.
> The changes are small, but it would be worth catching them in a new 
> revision.
> Please post it when you have it, no need to check with me.
> 
> Once you've done that, we'll hand it over to Alvaro as the incoming AD, 
> and he
> can put it on an IESG telechat.
> 
> Cheers,
> Adrian
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: peter van der Stok [mailto:[e-mail]]
>> Sent: 23 March 2015 14:49
>> To: Meral Shirazipour
>> Cc: [e-mail];
> [e-mail]
>> Subject: Re: Gen-ART Last Call review of 
>> draft-ietf-roll-applicability-home-
>> building-08
>> 
>> HI Meral,
>> 
>> Thanks for the suggestions.
>> I have no problem with any of them. I think they are quite justified.
>> Thank you very much for pointing them out.
>> Concerning scene and group control. I may suppress the word "scene".
>> About [occuswitch] I have to look for a valid alternative. However,
>> these links are maintained by a company, which changes information
>> frequently.
>> Sorry for missing out some of the acronyms. I thought I caught them 
>> out
>> all.
>> 
>> Greetings,
>> 
>> Peter
>> 
>> 
>> Meral Shirazipour schreef op 2015-03-22 21:28:
>> > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
>> > Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
>> > http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq.
>> >
>> > Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
>> > you may receive.
>> >
>> > Document: draft-ietf-roll-applicability-home-building-08
>> > Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour
>> > Review Date: 2015-03-21
>> > IETF LC End Date:  2015-03-23
>> > IESG Telechat date: NA
>> >
>> >
>> > Summary:
>> > This draft is ready to be published as Standards Track RFC but I have
>> > some comments.
>> >
>> > Major issues:
>> >
>> > Minor issues:
>> >
>> > Nits/editorial comments:
>> > -[Page 1], "RPL" first used in title/abstract, Would be good to spell
>> > it out.
>> > -[Page 5], Section 2, "Monitoring of functional correctness is at
>> > least as important.". As important as what? (not clear)
>> > -[Page 5], Section 2, "Devices typically communicate their status
>> > regularly and send alarm messages notifying a malfunction of equipment
>> > or network."
>> > Not clear what equipment is? network node is an equipment?
>> > -[Page 6], Section 2.1, "for large installation"--->"for a large
>> > installation"
>> > -[Page 8], Section 2.2.2, "fire detectors and the smoke dampers need
>> > to be put in place to meet the stringent delay requirements."
>> > Where can we find a value for the delay requirement of fire detectors?
>> > A value or reference would be good.
>> > -[Page 9], Section 2.2.4,"advanced scene and group control". Not clear
>> > what "scene" means.
>> > -[Page 13], Section 4.1, "assumes the role as
>> > authoritative"--->"assumes the role of authoritative"
>> > -[Page 16], section 4.1.8, please spell out first use CBC-MAC (Cipher
>> > Block Chaining Message Authentication Code)
>> > -[Page 16], section 4.1.10, it would be good to give the RFCs.
>> > -[Page 16], section 4.2.4, MLE to spell out at first use "mesh link
>> > establishment"
>> > -[Page 22], "CoAp" first used in section 7.4, but spelled out in
>> > section 8.
>> > -[Page 18], section 5.1.1., "to throw away too late messages", how are
>> > too late messages identified?
>> > -[Page 27], [I-D.ietf-6lo-lowpanz] to be replaced by RFC7428
>> > -[Page 28], link to [occuswitch] to be verified.
>> > -Through the document both "ms" and "msec" are used. Selecting one for
>> > consistency would be better.
>> >
>> > Best Regards,
>> > Meral
>> > ---
>> > Meral Shirazipour
>> > Ericsson
>> > Research
>> > www.ericsson.com