[Seamoby] comments on the paging protocol assessment draft

I have a couple of comments to the paging assessment draft
(draft-ietf-seamoby-protocol-assessment-00.txt).

First thing is the process of selection. The criteria for selection
from the proposals, and the result should be included in the
assessment draft.  Specifically, the selected protocol is the one
having the largest number of the lowest ratings, i.e., containing six
1's, and neither having the largest number of the highest ratings nor
having the highest avarage rate.  There is a logical leap between the
ratings and the final selection. So I think that selection team had
some criteria other than the ratings.

And the second thing is that the comments that were posted by some of
the authors of the candidate protocols before the SLC meeting should
also be reflected to the assessment draft, if those comments are
relevant.

Regards,
Yoshihiro Ohba

_______________________________________________
Seamoby mailing list
Seamoby@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/seamoby