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

[Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


>>>>> "Mukul" == Mukul Goyal <[e-mail]> writes:
    Mukul> Hi Michael

    >> My suggestion is that the "controversial" values like this SHOULD be
    Mukul> identified more clearly with text akin to:
    >> Specific consideration of this value MUST be addressed
    Mukul> in applicability statement(s).
    >> (I'd even like to put some kind of 2119-like word in about this)

    Mukul> You mean to say that P2P-RPL draft should require the
    Mukul> home/building/whomsoever_cares_to_use_p2p_rpl applicability
    Mukul> statement to address how to set P2P-RPL trickle parameters? 

Yes, exactly.
There could be a template in the document which must be filled in.

Text something like:

  Applicability Statements that specify P2P-RPL MUST provide values for
  the following parameters: X, Y, Z.  

  Considerations for setting X.
  Considerations for setting Y.
  Considerations for setting Z.

  For example:
     The FOOBAR application scenario is a dense mesh needing fast
     repair times and having routing nodes without power limits.  
     Therefore:
     1) the X value SHOULD be set between a and b.
     2) the Y value SHOULD be no greater than c.
     3) the Z value setting is not critical.

- -- 
Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>, Sandelman Software Works 
IETF ROLL WG co-chair.    http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/roll/charter/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Finger me for keys

iQEVAwUBT6fSlICLcPvd0N1lAQIfpQgAwBVrjzOdOeVUOOzksTatl9aERaIkYpkj
Dj0hEYoogjZE/jQIKG1GCJtoYLuYiQ1Lv4/dtwsnap3KUrymkDk1UdPjfbcKm8oc
chHdf4Kg+MUYO7GYeOjlAOqJ/WID9mV/9cVVB71mr+33b2vmhMcnaS6Pv+spgtOS
WTDusylkJC6nz2O+DAhjHFT9lzQGvJxfKDs/eXxU8RQK44XHymU7ZmlAV37AeZQB
R3kZtFu3v9DC/0ILHz3P6go/iO/n5phd3GUeEMNJjFrrTnyqzIrU0wvwTQ4gaVnG
L40iWlpTHxNoLwRMcvPopWVIVfzGbO7bXzcT8je/mccWaDyaPj5gLw==
=mNPX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----