Re: [Roll] STRONG NUDGE: review draft-ietf-roll-mpl-parameter-configuration

Michael, all WG members,

Thanks for attention. I'll update the draft by tomorrow to include minor edits. Anyway core idea will be unchanged. I believe we need to have a control for MPL parameters because it means control over network usage, redundancy/reliability, and end-to-end latency. I really appreciate your comments.

Thanks,

Yusuke

(2014-06-26 01:03), Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> The WG adopted:
>      http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-roll-mpl-parameter-configuration/
>
> in march.  There has been only minor discussion on this document, despite
> there being a reasonable number of people who said they thought this was a
> valuable addition to LLNs, and MPL.
>
> The authors posted a few comments about a question I had: what happens to MPL
> if the parameters are changed, and I think that I'm satisfied.
>
> At this point, it's the WG job to read the document and post questions.
> Even if the protocol is no interest to you, but you've read it, you could say
> so. Clearly if you have an interest in the protocol, and in MPL, please review.
>
> The chairs think that this document may be read for a WGLC, but we do not
> think that there has been enough discussion for us to believe that the
> document has been sufficiently read.
>
> Please comment before IETF90 so we don't have to abandon the work!
>
> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
> IETF ROLL WG co-chair.    http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/roll/charter/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> Roll@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
>