Dear Carlos Bernardos. Thanks for your valuable comments and sorry for the late response.
To resolve your comments, I updated the draft. Please, find inline responses. And, I submitted the revision draft based on your comments. https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-6lo-use-cases-15.html It is appreciated to check again and let me know any missing points. Best regards. Yong-Geun. 2022년 11월 18일 (금) 오전 4:08, Carlos Bernardos via Datatracker < nore...@ietf.org>님이 작성: > Reviewer: Carlos Bernardos > Review result: Ready with Nits > > I am an assigned INT directorate reviewer for draft-ietf-6lo-use-cases. > These > comments were written primarily for the benefit of the Internet Area > Directors. > Document editors and shepherd(s) should treat these comments just like they > would treat comments from any other IETF contributors and resolve them > along > with any other Last Call comments that have been received. For more > details on > the INT Directorate, see https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/intdir/about/ > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/intdir/about/>. > > The document describes the applicability of IPv6 over 6lo networks and > provides > some examples of practical deployments. The document is well written and > provides a very good set of references for the interested reader to > continue > digging. > > I think given the nature of the document, there are not issues for > INT-AREA, as > those aspects that would be indeed very relevant there are mostly tackled > on > the many other documents that are referenced. I find the document quite > informative though and I enjoyed and learned quite a lot reading it. > > Based on my review, if I was on the IESG I would ballot this document as > YES. > > The following are minor issues (typos, misspelling, minor text > improvements) > with the document: > > - I would personally prefer not to have explicit references to WGs, as the > document probably will live longer that the 6lo WG (though there are > examples > on the IETF for the other way around ;) ) and I think the document should > not > assume that the reader is familiar with IETF WGs. > [Hong] Update as your comment and delete explicit references to WGs. > > - "for the IEEE Std 802.15.4[IEEE802159].)" --> "for the IEEE Std 802.15.4 > [IEEE802159].)" > [Hong] Update as your comment
_______________________________________________ 6lo mailing list 6lo@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo
