From yoshihiro.ohba@toshiba.co.jp Tue Sep 4 22:16:43 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: 6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: 6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A7AF11E80BA for <6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Sep 2012 22:16:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -8.089 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.089 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qalxVITBZ5MJ for <6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Sep 2012 22:16:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imx12.toshiba.co.jp (imx12.toshiba.co.jp [61.202.160.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63B2721F8422 for <6lowpan@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Sep 2012 22:16:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from arc11.toshiba.co.jp ([133.199.90.127]) by imx12.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id q855Getu008544 for <6lowpan@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 14:16:40 +0900 (JST) Received: (from root@localhost) by arc11.toshiba.co.jp id q855Gei9028778 for 6lowpan@ietf.org; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 14:16:40 +0900 (JST) Received: from ovp11.toshiba.co.jp [133.199.90.148] by arc11.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id QAA28772; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 14:16:40 +0900 Received: from mx2.toshiba.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ovp11.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id q855Gddg015001 for <6lowpan@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 14:16:40 +0900 (JST) Received: from tsbpoa.po.toshiba.co.jp by toshiba.co.jp id q855GaMh028691; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 14:16:36 +0900 (JST) Received: from [133.196.20.88] by mail.po.toshiba.co.jp (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.1 HotFix 0.05 (built Oct 21 2004)) with ESMTPA id <0M9V00HVK2NNH0G0@mail.po.toshiba.co.jp> for 6lowpan@ietf.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2012 14:16:36 +0900 (JST) Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 14:16:38 +0900 From: Yoshihiro Ohba In-reply-to: <94E510D0-CFD3-45D5-BB4B-081A27D6AA4E@tzi.org> To: 6lowpan@ietf.org Message-id: <5046E036.1070704@toshiba.co.jp> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit References: <18113.1339529290@marajade.sandelman.ca> <87AC724B-DC1F-41C2-9F1F-4357FA7B45A3@tzi.org> <31218.1345834358@sandelman.ca> <94E510D0-CFD3-45D5-BB4B-081A27D6AA4E@tzi.org> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0 Subject: Re: [6lowpan] [Roll] draft-bormann-ghc X-BeenThere: 6lowpan@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Working group discussion for IPv6 over LowPan networks <6lowpan.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 05:16:43 -0000 It would be appreciated if someone can answer to my technical review of GHC draft which I sent to the list: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/6lowpan/current/msg03513.html Thanks, Yoshihiro Ohba (2012/08/25 13:58), Carsten Bormann wrote: > I don't know -- it could be handled as AD sponsored. I'm confident we'll find a way. > > More interesting is *when* it should go. I'm in the process of obtaining research results that might improve the performance with DTLS packets a bit (with minimal implementation impact). We could rush GHC before that is complete, wait a couple of months for these results, or even try to get more input. What is the best timing? We need input from implementers to decide this. > > Sent from Mobile > > On 24.08.2012, at 21:52, Michael Richardson wrote: > >> >>>>>>> "Carsten" == Carsten Bormann writes: >> Carsten> Changing to WG chair mode for a moment: >> >> Carsten> The 6LoWPAN WG is alive and well and is in the process of >> Carsten> closing its remaining two work items (6LoWPAN-ND, 6LoWPAN >> Carsten> for BTLE). >> >> Carsten> However, you are right in that the 6LoWPAN WG no longer takes new work on. >> Carsten> The chairs, with the ADs and the chairs of other WGs, will >> Carsten> ensure that interesting work finds an appropriate home. >> >> ...? where will GHC go? >> >> -- >> Michael Richardson >> -at the cottage- >> _______________________________________________ >> 6lowpan mailing list >> 6lowpan@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan > _______________________________________________ > 6lowpan mailing list > 6lowpan@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan > From cabo@tzi.org Wed Sep 5 00:24:30 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: 6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: 6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 217E521E8053 for <6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 00:24:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WxBJg-AfssJM for <6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 00:24:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C3F221F846A for <6lowpan@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 00:24:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de (smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.224.120]) by informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q857OIJm018566; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 09:24:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (zoo.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.218.16]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A9191D2B; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 09:24:18 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.0 \(1486\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: <5046E036.1070704@toshiba.co.jp> Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2012 09:24:19 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <4DF53A33-9BAE-4344-8108-4F789D54CCA6@tzi.org> References: <18113.1339529290@marajade.sandelman.ca> <87AC724B-DC1F-41C2-9F1F-4357FA7B45A3@tzi.org> <31218.1345834358@sandelman.ca> <94E510D0-CFD3-45D5-BB4B-081A27D6AA4E@tzi.org> <5046E036.1070704@toshiba.co.jp> To: Yoshihiro Ohba X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1486) Cc: 6lowpan@ietf.org Subject: Re: [6lowpan] [Roll] draft-bormann-ghc X-BeenThere: 6lowpan@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Working group discussion for IPv6 over LowPan networks <6lowpan.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 07:24:30 -0000 On Sep 5, 2012, at 07:16, Yoshihiro Ohba = wrote: > It would be appreciated if someone can answer to my technical review > of GHC draft which I sent to the list: >=20 > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/6lowpan/current/msg03513.html Hi Yoshihiro, I read that comment as an editorial suggestion, so I didn't see the need = to discuss it in detail on the list. I actually don't believe munching up all the variable bits into "***" = makes the exposition clearer. So far, all people I have talked to didn't have a misunderstanding about = what was meant by, say, 11nnnkkk. The "***" style may be more pedantically "correct", but I think it is = actually less clear. (And implementers mostly read the examples to figure out stuff = anyway...) Gr=FC=DFe, Carsten From yoshihiro.ohba@toshiba.co.jp Wed Sep 5 01:05:52 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: 6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: 6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7279021F8697 for <6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 01:05:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.089 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.089 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XkLjWpab+dXI for <6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 01:05:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imx2.toshiba.co.jp (inet-tsb5.toshiba.co.jp [202.33.96.24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B835221F8699 for <6lowpan@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 01:05:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from arc1.toshiba.co.jp ([133.199.194.235]) by imx2.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id q8585nsG016182; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 17:05:49 +0900 (JST) Received: (from root@localhost) by arc1.toshiba.co.jp id q8585n8Q005436; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 17:05:49 +0900 (JST) Received: from unknown [133.199.192.144] by arc1.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id TAA05431; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 17:05:49 +0900 Received: from mx.toshiba.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ovp2.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id q8585nag006800; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 17:05:49 +0900 (JST) Received: from tsbpoa.po.toshiba.co.jp by toshiba.co.jp id q8585miF023260; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 17:05:48 +0900 (JST) Received: from [133.196.20.88] by mail.po.toshiba.co.jp (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.1 HotFix 0.05 (built Oct 21 2004)) with ESMTPA id <0M9V00HD5AHNH0N0@mail.po.toshiba.co.jp>; Wed, 05 Sep 2012 17:05:48 +0900 (JST) Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 17:05:51 +0900 From: Yoshihiro Ohba In-reply-to: <4DF53A33-9BAE-4344-8108-4F789D54CCA6@tzi.org> To: Carsten Bormann Message-id: <504707DF.4090504@toshiba.co.jp> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT References: <18113.1339529290@marajade.sandelman.ca> <87AC724B-DC1F-41C2-9F1F-4357FA7B45A3@tzi.org> <31218.1345834358@sandelman.ca> <94E510D0-CFD3-45D5-BB4B-081A27D6AA4E@tzi.org> <5046E036.1070704@toshiba.co.jp> <4DF53A33-9BAE-4344-8108-4F789D54CCA6@tzi.org> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0 Cc: 6lowpan@ietf.org Subject: Re: [6lowpan] [Roll] draft-bormann-ghc X-BeenThere: 6lowpan@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Working group discussion for IPv6 over LowPan networks <6lowpan.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 08:05:52 -0000 Hi Carsten, Thank you for your response. Why do you think the *** style is less clear? Thanks, Yoshihiro Ohba (2012/09/05 16:24), Carsten Bormann wrote: > On Sep 5, 2012, at 07:16, Yoshihiro Ohba wrote: > >> It would be appreciated if someone can answer to my technical review >> of GHC draft which I sent to the list: >> >> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/6lowpan/current/msg03513.html > > Hi Yoshihiro, > > I read that comment as an editorial suggestion, so I didn't see the need to discuss it in detail on the list. > > I actually don't believe munching up all the variable bits into "***" makes the exposition clearer. > So far, all people I have talked to didn't have a misunderstanding about what was meant by, say, 11nnnkkk. > The "***" style may be more pedantically "correct", but I think it is actually less clear. > (And implementers mostly read the examples to figure out stuff anyway...) > > Grüße, Carsten > > From cabo@tzi.org Wed Sep 5 01:14:38 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: 6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: 6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EA5121F84CD for <6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 01:14:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8ioI1knPoxX5 for <6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 01:14:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.201.18]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E31421F844D for <6lowpan@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 01:14:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de (smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.224.120]) by informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q858DmSe013325; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 10:13:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (zoo.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.218.16]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 11220D71; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 10:13:48 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.0 \(1486\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: <504707DF.4090504@toshiba.co.jp> Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2012 10:13:48 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <4AD1F4B9-4CBB-4A7A-927B-B99D67A3AE2E@tzi.org> References: <18113.1339529290@marajade.sandelman.ca> <87AC724B-DC1F-41C2-9F1F-4357FA7B45A3@tzi.org> <31218.1345834358@sandelman.ca> <94E510D0-CFD3-45D5-BB4B-081A27D6AA4E@tzi.org> <5046E036.1070704@toshiba.co.jp> <4DF53A33-9BAE-4344-8108-4F789D54CCA6@tzi.org> <504707DF.4090504@toshiba.co.jp> To: Yoshihiro Ohba X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1486) Cc: 6lowpan@ietf.org Subject: Re: [6lowpan] [Roll] draft-bormann-ghc X-BeenThere: 6lowpan@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Working group discussion for IPv6 over LowPan networks <6lowpan.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 08:14:38 -0000 On Sep 5, 2012, at 10:05, Yoshihiro Ohba = wrote: > Why do you think the *** style is less clear? because 11nnnkkk turns into 11****** -- this loses visual access to the = bit allocation. Again, this is all about the exposition, not about the technical content = of the proposal, so I'm not sure we need good consensus on what is the = best style (we only need to make sure there is no potential for = misinterpretation). Gr=FC=DFe, Carsten From yoshihiro.ohba@toshiba.co.jp Wed Sep 5 16:39:14 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: 6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: 6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E355621F86D5 for <6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 16:39:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.089 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.089 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 91VZYSC8+ign for <6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 16:39:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imx12.toshiba.co.jp (imx12.toshiba.co.jp [61.202.160.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D725D21F86C3 for <6lowpan@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 16:39:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from arc11.toshiba.co.jp ([133.199.90.127]) by imx12.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id q85Nd9UL029900; Thu, 6 Sep 2012 08:39:09 +0900 (JST) Received: (from root@localhost) by arc11.toshiba.co.jp id q85Nd9cC023054; Thu, 6 Sep 2012 08:39:09 +0900 (JST) Received: from ovp11.toshiba.co.jp [133.199.90.148] by arc11.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id JAA23053; Thu, 6 Sep 2012 08:39:09 +0900 Received: from mx.toshiba.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ovp11.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id q85Nd9gQ002108; Thu, 6 Sep 2012 08:39:09 +0900 (JST) Received: from tsbpoa.po.toshiba.co.jp by toshiba.co.jp id q85Nd8aS009467; Thu, 6 Sep 2012 08:39:08 +0900 (JST) Received: from [133.196.20.88] by mail.po.toshiba.co.jp (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.1 HotFix 0.05 (built Oct 21 2004)) with ESMTPA id <0M9W003IKHP8T510@mail.po.toshiba.co.jp>; Thu, 06 Sep 2012 08:39:08 +0900 (JST) Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2012 08:39:12 +0900 From: Yoshihiro Ohba In-reply-to: <4AD1F4B9-4CBB-4A7A-927B-B99D67A3AE2E@tzi.org> To: Carsten Bormann Message-id: <5047E2A0.8070302@toshiba.co.jp> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT References: <18113.1339529290@marajade.sandelman.ca> <87AC724B-DC1F-41C2-9F1F-4357FA7B45A3@tzi.org> <31218.1345834358@sandelman.ca> <94E510D0-CFD3-45D5-BB4B-081A27D6AA4E@tzi.org> <5046E036.1070704@toshiba.co.jp> <4DF53A33-9BAE-4344-8108-4F789D54CCA6@tzi.org> <504707DF.4090504@toshiba.co.jp> <4AD1F4B9-4CBB-4A7A-927B-B99D67A3AE2E@tzi.org> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0 Cc: 6lowpan@ietf.org Subject: Re: [6lowpan] [Roll] draft-bormann-ghc X-BeenThere: 6lowpan@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Working group discussion for IPv6 over LowPan networks <6lowpan.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 23:39:15 -0000 Hi Carsten, (2012/09/05 17:13), Carsten Bormann wrote: > because 11nnnkkk turns into 11****** -- this loses visual access to the bit allocation. > > Again, this is all about the exposition, not about the technical content of the proposal, so I'm not sure we need good consensus on what is the best style (we only need to make sure there is no potential for misinterpretation). > I don't care if this is technical and editorial, but I do care the quality of IETF specification. Honestly I think the current representation is too loose, and I am afraid you would get the same comment from others. If you think *** representation loses visual access to the bit allocation, there can be other ways of representation such as "| 1| 1|n0|n1|n2|k0|k1|k2|". This is something to think about for general readers.. Thanks you, Yoshihiro Ohba > Grüße, Carsten From cabo@tzi.org Thu Sep 6 04:46:28 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: 6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: 6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B01621F85AA for <6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Sep 2012 04:46:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6AsY4sCk9eL9 for <6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Sep 2012 04:46:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E02CF21F8592 for <6lowpan@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Sep 2012 04:46:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de (smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.224.120]) by informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q86BkI7B025573; Thu, 6 Sep 2012 13:46:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.217.105] (p54893EE0.dip.t-dialin.net [84.137.62.224]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 82B6241; Thu, 6 Sep 2012 13:46:18 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.0 \(1486\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: <5047E2A0.8070302@toshiba.co.jp> Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 13:46:17 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <18113.1339529290@marajade.sandelman.ca> <87AC724B-DC1F-41C2-9F1F-4357FA7B45A3@tzi.org> <31218.1345834358@sandelman.ca> <94E510D0-CFD3-45D5-BB4B-081A27D6AA4E@tzi.org> <5046E036.1070704@toshiba.co.jp> <4DF53A33-9BAE-4344-8108-4F789D54CCA6@tzi.org> <504707DF.4090504@toshiba.co.jp> <4AD1F4B9-4CBB-4A7A-927B-B99D67A3AE2E@tzi.org> <5047E2A0.8070302@toshiba.co.jp> To: Yoshihiro Ohba X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1486) Cc: 6lowpan@ietf.org Subject: Re: [6lowpan] [Roll] draft-bormann-ghc X-BeenThere: 6lowpan@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Working group discussion for IPv6 over LowPan networks <6lowpan.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2012 11:46:28 -0000 OK, OK, I went ahead and added a section 1.3 that defines the meaning of = the notation in a slightly more rigorous way. Thanks for insisting on this... Htmlized: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bormann-6lowpan-ghc-05 Diff: = http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-bormann-6lowpan-ghc-05 Gr=FC=DFe, Carsten From yoshihiro.ohba@toshiba.co.jp Fri Sep 7 18:03:36 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: 6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: 6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B691221E8044 for <6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Sep 2012 18:03:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -8.089 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.089 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Am-BT9bDFqfu for <6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Sep 2012 18:03:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imx12.toshiba.co.jp (imx12.toshiba.co.jp [61.202.160.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1243721E8042 for <6lowpan@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Sep 2012 18:03:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from arc11.toshiba.co.jp ([133.199.90.127]) by imx12.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id q8813YGI020307; Sat, 8 Sep 2012 10:03:34 +0900 (JST) Received: (from root@localhost) by arc11.toshiba.co.jp id q8813YaT021018; Sat, 8 Sep 2012 10:03:34 +0900 (JST) Received: from ovp11.toshiba.co.jp [133.199.90.148] by arc11.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id LAA21017; Sat, 8 Sep 2012 10:03:34 +0900 Received: from mx2.toshiba.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ovp11.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id q8813XVE017901; Sat, 8 Sep 2012 10:03:33 +0900 (JST) Received: from tsbpoa.po.toshiba.co.jp by toshiba.co.jp id q8813XsJ001884; Sat, 8 Sep 2012 10:03:33 +0900 (JST) Received: from [133.199.146.194] by mail.po.toshiba.co.jp (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.1 HotFix 0.05 (built Oct 21 2004)) with ESMTPA id <0MA000C4EAXWEKL0@mail.po.toshiba.co.jp>; Sat, 08 Sep 2012 10:03:33 +0900 (JST) Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2012 10:03:38 +0900 From: Yoshihiro Ohba In-reply-to: To: Carsten Bormann Message-id: <504A996A.1040401@toshiba.co.jp> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT References: <18113.1339529290@marajade.sandelman.ca> <87AC724B-DC1F-41C2-9F1F-4357FA7B45A3@tzi.org> <31218.1345834358@sandelman.ca> <94E510D0-CFD3-45D5-BB4B-081A27D6AA4E@tzi.org> <5046E036.1070704@toshiba.co.jp> <4DF53A33-9BAE-4344-8108-4F789D54CCA6@tzi.org> <504707DF.4090504@toshiba.co.jp> <4AD1F4B9-4CBB-4A7A-927B-B99D67A3AE2E@tzi.org> <5047E2A0.8070302@toshiba.co.jp> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0 Cc: 6lowpan@ietf.org Subject: Re: [6lowpan] [Roll] draft-bormann-ghc X-BeenThere: 6lowpan@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Working group discussion for IPv6 over LowPan networks <6lowpan.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2012 01:03:36 -0000 Hi Carsten, The new version with the meaning of the nation looks great. Thank you, Yoshihiro Ohba (2012/09/06 20:46), Carsten Bormann wrote: > OK, OK, I went ahead and added a section 1.3 that defines the meaning of the notation in a slightly more rigorous way. > Thanks for insisting on this... > > Htmlized: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bormann-6lowpan-ghc-05 > Diff: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-bormann-6lowpan-ghc-05 > > Grüße, Carsten > >