[Roll] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl-10: (with COMMENT)

Warren Kumari via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Tue, 20 April 2021 22:03 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: roll@ietf.org
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2AE53A1F1F; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 15:03:48 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Warren Kumari via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl@ietf.org, roll-chairs@ietf.org, roll@ietf.org, Ines Robles <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com>, aretana.ietf@gmail.com, mariainesrobles@googlemail.com
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.28.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
Message-ID: <161895622802.25938.15008636103702222386@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2021 15:03:48 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/VhLp__JvUArl8BTVyEluCElUkp4>
Subject: [Roll] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl-10: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Tue, 20 Apr 2021 22:03:55 -0000

Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl-10: 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 DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

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


Firstly, thank you for writing this - I'm really not a ROLL person, but I found
it interesting...

I support John and Rob's DISCUSSes, but I'll let them carry the heavy load :-)

I have a few nits:
Section 4.3:
      A one-bit reserved field.  This field MUST be initialized to zero
      by the sender and MUST be ignored by the receiver.'
I could find no 'r'  in Figure 3  - did you mean 'X'?

Section 6.2.1, Step 1:
'If the S bit in the received RREQ-DIO is set to 0, the router MUST determine
into the upward direction (towards the OrigNode) of the link.' I was unable to
parse this. More worryingly, I was also not able to figure out what it should

Section 6.3.1:
'default to 1/4 of the time duration determined by the L bit.' - s/L bit/L
value'. This says that the default of 1/4 of the time duration, but I didn't
see where /why the default would change. Also, isn't 'time' in 'time duration'
unnecessary? Duration implies time.

Appendix A:
'The combination of Received Signal Strength Indication(downstream)  (RSSI) and
Expected Number of Transmissions(upstream)" (ETX) ' -- this is a random closing
quote without an opening one.